,* 


Q 


i^^« 


■  -  )  N7j  r.--  y<v  '.X  /■  .  :jr..--, 


*v^_- ••••'*    ^p* 


,le: 


^^ 


t 


. 


.'    .       vS 


THE  PROTECTIVE  TARIFF 


WHAT  IT  DOES  FOR  US! 


HERMANN  LIEB. 

)  » 


The  tranquility  "/society  am/  the  security  of the  individual  are 
:  the  harmony  and  good-will  of  one  man  toward  another 
arc  cherished  by  equity.  Crabbe. 


FOURTH   AND   REVISED  EDITION. 


CHICAGO,  NEW  YORK  &  SAN  FRANCISCO. 

BELFORD,  CLARKE  &  CO. 

1888. 


Copyrighted,  1887, 

BY 

HERMANN  LIEB. 


Rights  of  Translation  Reserved. 


Donohtte  &  Henkeberry,  Printers  and  Binders,  Chicago. 


L(,2 


ley 


TO  THE 


YOUNG  MEN 


OF 

THE  UNITED  STATES 

GO 

THIS  VOLUME  IS  DEDICATED 

O  BY 

z 

THE  AUTHOR. 


to 

a: 

5 


O 

t 
C5 


429C 


CONTENTS. 


PAr;r. 

Preface,            .......  5 

Introduction,         ._.__.  7 

Historical  Sketch,     ------  15 

General  Effect  of  Protection,          -  49 

Effect  of  Protection  on  Farmers,         -  64 

The  Home  Market,  - 

Effect  of  Protection  on  the  Wages  of  Labor,         -  97 

Effect  of  Protection  on  Labor  in  Protected  Industries,  112 

Our  Pauper  Labor,                       ...  133 

Effect  of  Protection  Upon  Unprotected  Lador,       -  1G0 

Effect  of  Protection  on  Manufacturers,              -  170 

Free  Raw  Material,  - 

Monopoly,  Trusts,  • 

Conclusions.  236 


PREFACE. 


rjlHIRTY  years  ago,  upon  becoming  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  I  found  public  attention  completely 
absorbed  in  the  question  of  African  slavery,  all  eco- 
nomic questions  being  entirely  dismissed  from  the  public 
mind. 

This  question,  and  all  others  relating  to  it,  having 
been  finally  disposed  of,  the  people  are  now  beginning 
to  turn  their  attention  to  the  less  sentimental  and 
more  practical  question  of  taxation. 

"While  every  cause  which  led  to  the  rupture  be- 
tween the  two  sections  of  the  country  has  been  brought 
to  final  settlement,  and  industry  and  trade  long  since 
returned  to  the  channels  of  peace;  while  nearly  two- 
thirds  of  the  national  debt  has  been  extinguished,  and 
the  treasury  is  filled  to  overflowing, — the  oppressive 
war  taxes,  imposed  in  the  hour  of  the  Nation's  peril, 
remain  undiminished.  Of  these  taxes,  those  on  luxuries, 
but  little  used  by  the  poor,  are  the  least  burdensome; 
those  upon  the  necessaries  of  life,  mostly  paid  by  the 
poor,  are  the  most  burdensome. 

The  representatives  of  monopoly,  and  of  a  privileged 
class,  propose  to  remove  the  former  and  to  retain  the 
latter. 

5 


6 

PREFACE. 

If  the  student  of  American  history  will  compare 
the  grievances  the  early  American  colonists  complained 
of  against  England,  he  will  find  they  were  not  more 
serious  and  not  so  oppressive  as  those  inflicted  to-day 
upon  the  unsuspicious  American  people  by  a  class  of 
men  "to  the  manor  born,"  and  while  the  injustice  of 
the  former  reacted  upon  a  foreign  country,  the  latter 
threatens  disaster  to  our  own. 

In  the  belief  that  it  is  the  duty  of  every  citizen 
of  this  republic  to  use  his  best  efforts  in  trying  to  take 
care  of  his  country,  I  have  written  this  small  book. 

HEKMANN  LIEB. 
Chicago,  Oct.  15, 1887. 


n^TEODUOTION. 


"  The  oppressiveness  of  a  tax  is  not  to  be  measured  by  the  insensibility  of 
the  people  on  whose  shoulders  it  is  laid." 

PROTECTION   A  TAX. 

SECUEITY  in  life,  property  and  liberty  is  the  first 
requisite  of  every  American  citizen,  and  if  there  is 
any  meaning  in  the  word  protection  when  used  in  connec- 
tion with  our  governmental  machinery,  it  must  necessarily 
convey  the  idea  that  the  security  we  are  now  enjoying  is 
insufficient,  and  that  we  are  threatened  by  some  common 
danger  against  which  the  government  is  asked  to  protect  us. 

If  there  is  any  such  danger  threatening  the  people  of 
this  country,  there  is  no  question  but  that  the  government, 
being  the  general  agency  of  the  great  American  society, 
constituted  for  the  very  purpose  of  protecting  its  mem- 
bers from  injury  in  person  and  property,  is  in  duty  bound 
to  afford  such  protection. 

We  are  all  in  favor  of  this  sort  of  protection  and  are 
ready  and  willing,  as  an  equivalent  for  such  protection, 
to  contribute  a  just  and  equitable  share  of  our  earnings  to 
the  government. 

It  is,  however,  the  only  form  of  protection  the  govern- 
ment can  justly  and  legally  bestow.  To  do  more  than 
that,  to  give  greater  protection  to  all,  or  bestow  greater 
benefits  upon  all,  and  do  it  justly  and  equally  for  every 
citizen,  is  a  mathematical  impossibility. 

The  logical  sequence  from  these  incontrovertible  prem- 
ises is,  that  every  proposition  on  the  part  of  the  law-mak- 
ing power  to  do  more  is  a  proposition  to  do  it  unequally ; 

7 


8  iN'r^MiM'.'    (TON. 

to  confer  vidti  .i >i . iix  tl>e  fx^.teilf s  enjoyed  by  the  mass 
of  the  people,  or  additional  favors  upon  a  portion  or  a 
distinct  class ;  and  as  such  additional  favors  cannot  be 
given  by  the  government  directly,  except  by  way  of  sub- 
sidy out  of  the  United  States  Treasury,  it  must  be  done 
indirectly  through  the  insidious  way  of  special  legislation  ; 
that  is,  by  creating  a  system  of  unequal  taxation. 

If  it  were  generally  understood,  if  the  majority  of 
the  American  people  were  convinced  of  the  fact,  that 
this  protective  system  necessarily  implied  unjust  and  un- 
equal taxation,  they  would  not  tolerate  it  for  an  instant. 

Well  aware  of  this  state  of  public  sentiment,  some  of 
the  advocates  of  this  system  evince  a  disposition  to  beg 
the  question  of  taxation,  and  to  bluntly  assert  "that  a 
duty  on  import  laid  for  the  purpose  of  protection  is  not 
a  tax."  When  it  is  considered  that  the  importer  who 
pays  the  tax  at  the  custom  house  charges  the  extra  amount 
upon  the  goods,  and  the  American  consumer  eventually 
pays  this  extra  charge,  this  assertion  that  protection  is  not 
a  tax  shows  the  implicit  confidence  the  protectionists 
have  in  the  stupendous  credulity  of  their  victims. 

Of  course,  the  laying  of  tariff  taxes  is  perfectly  legal 
and  proper  as  long  as  they  are  laid  for  the  purpose  of 
raising  revenue  for  the  government.  The  government  of 
Great  Britain  raises  nearly  one  hundred  million  of  dollars 
of  her  revenue  from  four  articles,  to-wit :  Tobacco,  wine, 
spirits  and  tea,  which  are  in  the  main  not  produced  in  the 
kingdom,  and  when  produced  the  import  tax  is  as  nearly  as 
possible  equal  to  the  internal  revenue  tax  paid  upon  simi- 
lar articles  by  the  home  producer.  Thus,  a  tax  upon  im- 
port does  not  necessarily  imply  a  tax  for  protection.  The 
moment,  however,  the  purpose  of  raising  revenue  for  the 
government  is  lust  sight  of,  and  import  taxes  are  adjusted 


INTRODUCTION  V 

and  laid  with  the  expressed  or  implied  purpose  of  giving 
private  enterprises  special  advantages,  or  protection 
against  competition,  that  moment  the  government  lends 
its  taxing  power  to  private  concerns.  It  stands  guard,  as 
it  were,  with  its  army  and  navy,  if  necessary,  over  these 
special  interests,  and  commands  the  consumers  of  the 
country  to  buy  there,  no  matter  what  the  quality  and  price 
may  be,  and,  therefore,  every  dollar  exacted  from  the 
consumer  for  home  commodities,  enhanced  in  price  on  ac- . 
count  of  such  special  protection,  is  a  tax — a  tax  more  un- 
just, more  oppressive  and  tyrannical  than  an  ordinary 
tax  unequally  levied,  because,  in  the  case  of  a  tax  for 
protection  the  money  does  not  go  to  the  government 
treasury  but  into  the  pockets  of  a  preferred  class. 

This  last  point  should  be  well  kept  in  mind,  and  the 
people  should  thoroughly  understand  that  protection  can 
be  nothing  else  than  a  tax  —  an  indirect  tax,  but  a  tax. 
They  all  know  what  taxes  are;  they  pay  their  taxes  upon 
real  estate  and  personal  property  direct  to  the  collector, 
who  hands  them  a  receipt  containing  in  dollars  and  cents 
the  exact  amount  of  their  tax.  But  everybody  does  not 
seem  to  know,  and  a  great  many  do  not  care  to  know, 
what  tariff  taxes  are,  while  others  imagine  that  the  money 
collected  by  the  government  upon  imported  goods  is  all 
the  taxes  paid  in  that  way,  and  that  these  taxes  are  paid 
by  those  only  who  buy  imported  goods. 

If  the  consumers  generally  understood  that  commodi- 
ties manufactured  in  this  country  are,  for  the  greater 
part,  enhanced  in  price  nearly  equal  to  the  amount  of  the 
duty  paid  upon  similar  commodities  imported,  or  forty 
per  cent  in  the  average,  they  would  not  hesitate  in  de- 
manding that  this  unjust  and  unequal  s}rstem  of  taxation 
be  either  promptly  reformed,  or,  that  a  revenue  method 


10  INTRODUCTION. 

•which  could  be  perverted  into  an  instrument  for  the 
gratification  of  individual  rapacity  be  eradicated,  root 
and  branch.  The  assertion  that  protection  ultimately 
leads  to  cheapness  has  been  answered,  "  that  it  were  best 
to  begin  with  cheapness." 

But. the  trouble  is  that  everybody  does  not  know  these 
facts,  and  the  deceptive  word  "  protection  "  does  its  stu- 
pefying work. 

It  is  this  torpid  state  of  public  opinion  which  causes 
Mr.  Blaine,  the  foremost  advocate  of  protection  in  this 
country,  in  his  "  Twenty  Years  in  Congress,"  exultingly 
to  remark:  "Mr.  Hamilton  was  the  foremost  financier 
in  this  country  who  understood  that  it  is  easier  to  collect 
ten  dollars  by  an  indirect  tax  than  to  collect  one  dollar 
by  direct  levy." 

Mr.  Blaine's  conclusions  are  correct.  It  is  easier  to 
collect  money  through  this  insidious  way,  but  will  he 
contend  that  it  is  easier  to  pay  f 

It  is  always  easier  to  take  surreptitiously  that  which 
is  not  due.  The  attempted  collection  of  ten  dollars  direct 
taxes,  where  only  one  dollar  is  due,  would  probably  meet 
with  difficulty,  and,  as  the  ten  dollars  can  be  secured  easier 
by  an  indirect  way,  Mr.  Blaine  recommends  that  way  as 
the  acme  of  financiering-statesmanship. 

[It  is  not  in  a  partisan  sense  that  we  now  or  shall  here- 
after mention  the  name  of  Mr.  Blaine.  Principles  are 
immutable,  but  governmental  theories  originate  with  and 
are  shaped  by  public  men.  The  open  declarations  and 
statements  of  these  leading  men  are  accepted  by  millions 
of  voters  as  their  political  dogma,  and,  therefore,  their 
names  cannot  be  disassociated  from  their  policies.  It 
will  not  be  denied  that  to-day  Mr.  Blaine  is  the  foremost 
representative  of   the  protection  theory  in  the  United 


INTRODUCTION.  11 

States,  and  that  his  statements  upon  this  theory  are  of  a 
more  authoritative  character  than  those  of  any  other  liv- 
ing man.] 

"  Such  a  system  of  taxation,"  said  Mr.  Kasson,  the 
able  representative  to  Congress  from  Iowa,  as  early  as 
1800,  and  before  he  had  changed  his  views  upon  that 
question,  "is  a  simple  system  of  robbery;  taking  from 
one  home  industry  and  paying  it  to  another.  If  we  go 
on  in  the  present  plan  of  adding  to  the  cost  of  everything 
we  produce,  there  is  not  another  country  on  the  face  of 
the  earth  that  will  contribute  one  cent  to  enrich  the  peo- 
ple of  the  United  States,  or  to  buy  a  single  article  of  our 
production.  It  is  an  attempt  against  the  law  of  Provi- 
dence, to  force  the  people  of  this  country  to  pay  more  for 
what  they  need  than  the  laws  of  Providence  would  other- 
wise require." 

Again  the  late  Emory  Storrs,  the  great  Republican 
orator  of  the  "West,  thus  tersely  describes  this  insidious 
tax  :  "  Finally,  what  is  tariff?  It  is  a  tax.  It  is  nothing 
less  than  and  nothing  but  a  tax.  It  is  a  tax  which  we 
do  not  pay  to  the  government,  but  to  the  manufacturer 
for  his  private  enrichment ;  for  where  protection  begins 
revenue  ceases.  The  consumer  is  impoverished,  the  gov- 
ernment is  not  aided.  Shall  this  system  be  continued? 
This  question  we  must  answer.  We  may  dodge  it  and 
evade  it  for  a  time,  but  the  millions  of  men  who  pro- 
tected the  Nation  in  the  hour  of  sore  peril  with  their  lives 
demand  that  this  question  shall  be  answered.  I  am  for 
myself  prepared  to  answer  it.  My  answer  is :  Our  soil  is 
free,  our  men  are  free,  our  thought  is  free,  our  speech  is 
free,  our  trade  shall  be  free  !  " 

As  to  the  meaning  and  purport  of  the  word  tax  there 
can   be  no  misunderstanding.      It  is  a  burden  laid  by 


12  INTRODUCTION. 

the  government  for  public  purposes.  Webster  defines 
it  as  "a  charge,  especially  a  pecuniary  burden,  which 
is  imposed  by  authority.  A  levy  of  any  kind  made  upon 
the  property  for  the  support  of  a  government." 

The  authority  of  Congress  to  levy  taxes  is  defined  in 
Section  8,  Article  VII,  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  as  follows :  "  The  Congress  shall  have  power  to 
levy  and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts  and  excises ;  to 
pay  the  debts  and  provide  for  the  common  defense  and 
general  welfare  of  the  United  States." 

It  will  not  successfully  be  maintained  that  the  public 
debt  is  being  paid,  or  the  common  defense  and  general 
Avelfare  of  the  United  States  promoted,  by  confiscat- 
ing the  property  of  one  citizen  under  the  tariff  power 
and  giving  it  as  a  bounty  or  gratuity  to  another  citizen, 
under  the  pretense  that  it  is  necessary  to  protect  him  in 
carrying  on  his  private  business.  Legal  authorities  and 
judicial  decisions  are  uniform  in  their  opinion  that  no  tax 
can  be  legally  levied  except  for  public  purposes. 

Judge  Thomas  Cooley,  former]  7  cf  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  State  of  Michigan,  and  Professor  of  Law  of  the 
University  of  that  State,  in  his  work  on  "  Principles  of 
Constitutional  Law,"  thus  defines  the  limits  of  taxation 
under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  : 

"  Constitutionally,  a  tax  can  have  no  other  basis  than 
the  raising  of  revenue  for  public  purposes,  and  whatever 
governmental  exaction  has  not  this  basis  is  .tyrannical 
and  unlawful.  A  tax  on  imports,  therefore,  the  purpose 
of  which  is  not  to  raise  revenue  but  to  discourage  and 
indirectly  prohibit  some  particular  import  for  the  bene- 
fit of  some  home  manufacturer,  may  well  be  questioned 
as  being  merely  colorable  and  therefore  not  warranted  by 
constitutional  principles." 


INTRODUCTION.  13 

Iii  a  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States,  concerning  the  legality  of  a  tax  levied  by  the 
city  of  Topeka  upon  the  authority  of  the  Legislature  of 
the  State  of  Kansas,  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  bonds 
given  to  a  bridge  company,  as  an  inducement  to  locate 
their  shops  in  that  city,  Judge  Miller  says:  "Of  all  the 
powers  conferred  on  the  government  that  of  taxation  is 
the  most  liable  to  abuse.  Given  a  purpose  or  object  for 
which  taxation  may  be  lawfully  used,  and  the  extent  of 
its  exercise  is  in  its  very  nature  unlimited."  And  further : 
"  This  power  can  as  readily  be  employed  against  one  class 
of  individuals  and  in  favor  of  another,  so  as  to  ruin  the 
one  class  and  give  unlimited  wealth  and  prosperity  to  the 
other,  if  there  are  no  implied  limitations  of  the  use  for 
which  the  power  may  be  exercised."  "To  lay  with  one 
hand  the  power  of  the  government  on  the  property  of  the 
citizen  and  with  the  other  bestow  it  upon  favored  individ- 
uals to  aid  private  enterprises  and  build  up  private  fort- 
unes, is  none  the  less  robbery  because  it  is  done  under  the 
form  of  law  and  is  called  taxation.  This  is  not  legislation. 
It  is  a  decree  under  legislative  forms.  JSTor  is  it  taxation. 
Beyond  a  cavil,  there  can  be  no  lawful  taxation  which  is 
not  laid  for  public  purpose." 

And  again,  in  an  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
State  of  Maine,  the  following  occurs :  "No  public  exigency 
can  require  private  spoliation  for  the  private  benefit  of 
favored  individuals.  If  the  citizen  is  protected  in  his 
property  by  the  state  against  the  public,  much  more  is  he 
against  private  rapacity.  It  is  the  taking  that  constitutes 
the  wrong,  no  matter  how  taken." 

And  again,  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  Iowa, 
in  Hanson  mYernon,  held :  "  ISTo  authority  or  even  dictum 
can  be  found  which  asserts  that  there  can  be  any  legiti- 


14  INTRODUCTION. 

mate  taxation  when  the  money  to  be  raised  does  not  go 
into  the  public  treasury.  If  there  is  any  proposition 
about  which  there  is  an  entire  and  uniform  weight  of 
judicial  authority,  it  is  that  taxes  are  to  be  imposed  for 
the  use  of  the  people  and  not  for  the  special  benefit  of 
individuals.  While  the  state  is  bound  to  protect  all,  it 
ceases  to  give  that  just  protection  when  it  affords  undue 
advantage  or  special  and  exclusive  privileges  to  particular 
individuals  at  the  cost  and  charge  of  the  rest  of  the 
community." 

Just  as  soon  as  the  people  become  conscious  of  these 
fundamental  truths,  there  will  no  doubt  be  a  sudden  end 
made  to  special  privileges  to  a  preferred  class. 

"  It  is  a  curiosity  of  despotism  that  the  people  are  too 
often  unconscious  of  their  slavery,  as  they  are  also 
unconscious  of  bad  laws.  A  wise  and  just  government 
measures  its  duties  not  by  what  the  people  will  bear 
without  a  murmur,  but  by  what  is  most  for  their  wel- 
fare." 


HISTORICAL  SKETCH. 


"To  comprehend  the  present  we  must  know  the  past.    To  conceive  the 
future,  we  must  understand  the  present.'' 

OX  examining  this  great  question  of  industrial  and 
commercial  liberty  irom  an  historical  standpoint,  it 
will  be  found  that  its  suppression,  or  the  uncalled-for 
interference  in  its  natural  course,  has  caused  many  wars, 
and  that,  indeed,  the  main  cause  of  our  own  revolutionary 
war  and  consequent  independence  was  the  result  of  such 
interference. 

The  foremost  American  historian,  Bancroft,  says  upon 
this  subject:  '"American  independence,  like  the  great 
rivers  of  the  country,  had  many  sources ;  but  the  head- 
spring that  colored  all  the  stream  was  the  Navigation 
Act." 

England's  unparalleled  prosperity  and  greatness  date 
not  from  the  time  when  her  ministers  and  lawmakers 
deemed  it  their  province  to  attend  to  the  private  business 
of  her  merchants  and  manufacturers,  but  from  the  period 
when  her  statesmen  had  made  the  discovery  that  the 
"  commercial  let-alone  policy  "  was  the  best.  In  our  case, 
it  is  questionable  whether  the  American  colonies  would 
ever  have  deemed  it  necessary,  or  even  desirable,  to  sever 
their  allegiance  from  the  mother  country  had  that  dis- 
covery been  made  a  century  and  a  half  ago.  The  truth 
of  the  old  proverb,  "it  is  an  ill  wind  that  blows  no- 
body any  good,"  is  strikingly  illustrated  in  the  case  of 
British  rule  in  the  American  colonies ;  and  it  may  well  be 
said,  that  the  people  of  these  United  States  owe  their 

15 


16  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

commanding  position  among  the  nations  of  the  world  to 
the  short-sightedness  and  avarice  of  their  English  rulers. 

From  the  very  commencement  of  the  colonies  the 
mother  country  watched  the  development  of  her  offspring 
with  a  jealous,  unmotherly  eye,  and,  instead  of  encour- 
aging the  spirit  of  enterprise  which  was  the  natural  out- 
growth of  prevailing  conditions,  the  British  Parliament 
enacted  one  law  after  another  with  the  avowed  object  of 
crippling  the  efforts  of  the  colonists  in  the  fields  of  com- 
merce and  industry,  in  order  to  keep  them  in  safe  sub- 
jection to  her  own  merchants  and  manufacturers. 

The  colonies  were  not  permitted  to  trade  with  any 
other  country,  and  their  cotton,  their  iron,  their  wool 
could  not  be  manufactured  into  commodities  here,  but  had 
to  be  shipped  to  England  in  English  ships  for  that  purpose. 

No  American  colony  could  purchase  its  silk  from 
France,  its  tea  from  China,  or  its  cloth  from  Germany, 
but  had  to  buy  in  England,  although  at  higher  prices. 

In  1632  an  act  was  passed  prohibiting  the  "exportation 
of  hats  from  the  colonies,  and  to  restrain  the  number  of 
apprentices  taken  by  hatmakers."  An  act  of  1750  pro- 
hibited, on  penalty  of  £200  sterling,  "the  erection  of 
any  mill  for  slitting  or  rolling  iron,  or  any  plating  forge 
to  work  with  a  tilt  hammer,  or  any  furnace  for  making- 
steel  in  any  of  the  colonies."  At  the  same  time  encour- 
agement was  given  to  export  pig  and  bar  iron  to  England 
for  her  manufactures.  The  exportation  of  all  wool  or 
woolen  goods  of  American  product  from  one  province  to 
another  by  water  or  by  land,  on  horseback  or  in  cart 
was  strictly  prohibited.  By  the  Statute  of  1763,  nothing 
was  allowed  "  to  be  imported  into  a  British  colony  except 
in  English-built  ships,  whereof  the  master  and  three- 
fourths  of  the  crew  were  English." 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  IT 

But  all  these  restrictions  notwithstanding,  commerce 
and  trade  gradually  and  steadily  increased.  To  England 
the  colonies  exported  lumber  of  all  sorts,  hemp,  flax, 
pitch,  tar,  oil,  rosin,  copper  ore,  pig  and  bar  iron,  whale 
fins,  tobacco,  rice,  fish,  indigo,  flax  seed,  bee's  wax,  raw 
silk ;  and  they  also  built  many  ships  wThich  found  a  ready 
market  in  the  mother  country. 

But  the  importation  of  British  goods,  in  consequence 
of  the  course  pursued  by  the  English  government,  was 
still  much  greater  than  the  amount  of  the  export  to  Eng- 
land, and  this  balance  against  the  colonies  had  to  be  paid 
in  gold,  realized  from  the  trade  with  the  West  India 
Islands. 

The  difficulties  to  be  overcome,  however,  seemed  rather 
to  stimulate  than  discourage  the  early  settlers  in  the 
manufacture  of  their  own  commodities ;  as,  for  instance, 
the  coarser  kinds  of  cutlery,  coarse  cloth,  both  linen  and 
woolen,  hats,  paper,  shoes,  household  furniture,  etc.,  were 
manufactured,  to  a  considerable  extent,  as  early  as  1738 ; 
of  course,  the  establishments  were  small  and  their  pro- 
ducts insufficient  to  supply  the  demand. 

During  the  war  of  the  revolution  the  commerce  of  the 
United  States  was  interrupted,  not  only  with  Great 
Britain,  but  in  a  great  measure  with  the  rest  of  the  world. 
The  greater  part  of  the  shipping  belonging  to  the  colonies 
was  destroyed  by  the  enemy,  or  perished  by  the  natural 
process  of  decay.  Under  these  circumstances  the  people 
of  this  country  were  thrown  upon  their  own  resources  for 
the  production  of  all  kinds  of  commodities. 

The  zeal,  ingenuity  and  industry  of  the  people  fur- 
nished the  country  with  articles  of  prime  necessity  and, 
in  a  measure,  supplied  the  place  of  a  foreign  market. 
Such  was  the  progress  in  arts  under  this  inherent  stimulus, 


18  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

after  the  return  of  peace,  that  when  uninterrupted  inter- 
course with  England  was  again  opened,  some  articles  which 
before  were  imported  altogether  were  found  so  well  and 
so  abundantly  manufactured  at  home  that  their  importa- 
tion was  stopped. 

But  with  the  disappearance  of  the  common  danger  the 
commonness  of  interests  also  ceased.  The  States  grew,  to 
a  great  extent,  commercially  independent  of  each  other 
and  the  old  jealousies  were  revived.  Massachusetts  had  a 
navigation  act  and  levied  import  duties,  and  other  States 
followed  her  example.  The  restrictions  and  prohibitions 
imposed  on  American  commerce  were  vexatious  and 
destructive,  and  while  Congress  had  power  to  enter  into 
treaties  of  reciprocity  it  could  retaliate  in  any  way  where 
its  offer  of  trade  was  refused. 

From  1783  until  the  adoption  of  the  Federal  constitu- 
tion, it  was  generally  recognized  that  Congress  should 
have  power  to  regulate  commercial  relations  between  the 
States  and  foreign  powers ;  but  the  supposed  interests  of 
the  different  States  presented  an  effectual  bar  against  ac- 
tion. These  obstacles  were  removed  by  the  adoption  of 
the  constitution.  No  sooner  had  the  first  Federal  Con- 
gress met  than  a  resolution  for  taxing  imports  was 
introduced  by  Mr.  Madison,  for  the  purpose  of  giving 
some  resources  to  the  almost  empty  treasury.  It  was 
during  the  debate  which  followed  that  Mr.  Hartley,  a  rep 
resentative  from  Pennsylvania,  said :  "  I  think  it  is 
both  politic  and  just  that  the  fostering  hand  of  the  na- 
tional government  should  be  extended  to  all  such  manu- 
factories as  will  tend  to  national  utility."  This  was  the 
key-note  of  our  protection  system. 

This  firsiJ-adfLbill,  which,  after  a  lengthy  discussion, 
was  adopted  with  the  significant  specification  in  its  pre- 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  19 

amble  that  one  of  its  objects  was  "the  encouragement 
and  protection  of  manufacture,"  and  on  the  4th  of  July- 
following  received  the  signature  of  President  Washington. 

The  signing  of  this  bill  is  frequently  cited  by  the  ad- 
vocates of  the  protective  system  in  support  of  their  asser- 
tions that  Washington  had  repeatedly  recommended  the 
exercise  of  the  "constitutional  right"  to  lay  taxes  for 
purposes  of  protection.  They  fail  to  mention  that  he 
said,  in  reference  to  this  subject  in  his  first  message  to 
Congress,  "  the  safety  and  interest  of  the  people  require 
that  they  should  protect  such  manufactures  as  tend  to 
render  them  independent  of  others  for  essential,  particu- 
larly for  military,  supplies."  Mark  this  language,  used 
nearly  a  century  ago. 

The  main  object  of  this  first  tariff  bill  was  to  fill  an 
empty  treasury  for  the  liquidation  of  public  debts  in- 
curred during  the  war  for  independence.  The  principle 
which  governed  its  final  adjustment  was  to  impose  the 
highest  per  centum  on  articles  of  luxury,  and  to  fix  the 
lowest  on  goods  and  products  of  ordinary  consumption 
among  all  classes  of  the  people,  which  is  just  the  reverse 
of  the  principle  which  governs  the  protectionists  in  their 
legislation  of  to-day.  This  spirit  of  fairness  was  well 
illustrated  by  the  fact  that  the  duty  on  Bohea  tea  was 
placed  at  six  cents  a  pound,  while  for  the  finer  Hyson  tea 
a  duty  of  twenty  cents  was  laid.  The  then  luxurious  ar- 
ticle of  loaf-sugar  was  taxed  with  three  cents  a  pound, 
while  the  brown  sugar,  used  by  the  poorer  classes,  paid 
but  one  cent.  French  and  German  wines  were  taxed 
eight  cents  a  gallon,  while  the  expensive  Madeira  paid  a 
tax  of  eighteen  cents;  and  so  on  through  the  list.  An 
average  duty  of  fifteen  per  cent  ad  valorem  — that  is,  upon 
the  value  of  the  article — was  placed  upon  the  different 


20  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

kinds  of  manufactures ;  revenue  was  in  those  days  the  ob- 
ject, protection  only  the  incident. 

The  first  authoritative  imprint  of  national  policy,  how- 
ever, was  sought  to  be  given  to  the  protective  system  by 
Alexander  Hamilton,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  under 
"Washington  and  the  recognized  leader  of  the  Federalist 
party.  It  has  been  questioned  whether  that  astute  states- 
man ever  earnestly  Avas  in  favor  of  a  republican  form  of 
government  for  this  country  ;  at  all  events,  "he  accepted 
it  more  from  necessity  than  from  choice." 

As  a  writer  of  note  happily  expresses  it,  "  he  repre- 
sented the  force  of  national  law,  as  Jefferson  represented 
that  of  individual  freedom.  To  Hamilton,  Jefferson's 
idea  of  liberty  was  that  of  a  bear  broken  loose  from  his 
chain  ;  and  to  Jefferson,  Hamilton's  idea  of  law  was  only 
that  of  British  law,  then  administered  by  the  few  and  for 
the  few,  with  little  regard  for  the  happiness  or  rights  of 
the  many."  In  other  words,  Jefferson  represented  the 
popular  and  Hamilton  the  aristocratic  idea  of  govern- 
ment. In  characterizing  Jefferson's  idea  of  liberty,  Mr. 
Hamilton  exhibits  his  contempt  for  the  great  mass  of 
common  laboring  people  by  comparing  them  to  the  bear, 
which  it  is  unsafe  to  release  from  its  chain. 

In  perfect  unison  with  these  views,  the  situation  of 
the  two  parties  in  this  tariff  controversy  is  described  by 
Mr.  Elaine  on  page  180,  vol.  I  of  his  work :  "  The  tariff 
question,"  he  says,  "has,  in  fact,  been  more  "frequently 
and  elaborately  debated  than  any  other  issue  since  the 
foundation  of  the  government.  The  present  generation 
is  more  familiar  with  the  question  relating  to  slavery,  to 
war,  to  reconstruction ;  but  as  these  disappear  by  per- 
manent adjustment,  the  tariff  question  returns  and  is 
eagerly  seized  upon  by   both  sides  to  the  controversy. 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  21 

More  than  any  other  issue,  it  represents  the  enduring  and 
persistent  line  of  division  between  the  two  parties  which, 
in  a  general  sense,  have  always  existed  in  the  United 
States;  th.  party  of  strict  construction  and  the  party  of 
liberal  construction;  the  party  of  State  rightsdnd  the  party 
of  national  supremacy,  the  party  of  stinted  n  venu<  and  re- 
stricted expenditun  <n*</  the  party  of  generous  income  with 
its  irJ.se  application  of  public  improvement;  the  party,  in 
short,  of  Jefferson  <t<j<tinst  the  party  of  Hamilton." 

The  issue  between  the  two  great  parties  could  not  pos- 
sibly be  stated  more  forcibly  or  more  truthfully.  In 
plain  English,  Mr.  Blaine's  classification  would  read  thus: 
The  party  of  strict  adherence  to  the  spirit  and  letter  of 
the  constitution  as  against  the  party  of  liberal  go-as-vou- 
please  construction;  the  party  of  local  self-government 
as  against  the  party  of  centralization  and  meddling  papa- 
government;  the  party  of  low  taxes  and  economv  in 
public  expenditures  as  against  the  party  of  high  expendi- 
tures and  subsidy  to  private  concerns;  the  party,  in  short, 
of  Jefferson,  the  representative  of  the  people  as  against 
Hamilton,  the  representative  of  privileged  classes. 

In  defining  Hamilton's  position  upon  the  question  of 
protection,  Mr.  Blaine  says :  "  Mr.  Hamilton  sustained 
the  plan  of  encouraging  home  manufacture  by  protective 
duties,  even  to  the  point,  in  some  instances,  of  making 
duties  equivalent  to  prohibition." 

If  these  were  Mr.  Hamilton's  sentiments,  he  did  not 
dare  to  assert  them  in  his  puBlic  writings.  Long  before 
the  adoption  of  the  Federal  constitution,  Mr.  Hamilton 
gave  utterance  upon  this  subject,  in  one  of  his  famous  let- 
ters to  the  Federalist,  which  is  in  direct  contradiction 
to  the  views  Mr.  Blaine  says  were  held  by  him. 

"  There  are  persons,"  Mr.  Hamilton  says,  "  who  imagine 


22  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

that  duties  can  never  be  carried  to  too  great  length,  since 
the  higher  they  are  the  more  they  will  promote  domestic 
manufacture.  But  all  extremes  are  pernicious  in  various 
ways.  Exorbitant  duties  tend  to  render  other  classes  of 
the  community  tributary,  in  an  improper  degree,  to  man- 
ufacturing classes,  to  whom  are  given  a  premature  mo- 
nopoly of  the  markets;  they  sometimes  force  industry  out 
of  its  more  natural  channel  into  others,  into  which  it 
flows  with  less  advantage,  and,  in  the  last  place,  they 
oppress  the  merchant.  When  they  are  paid  by  the  mer- 
chant, they  operate  as  an  additional  tax  upon  the  import- 
ing State,  whose  citizens  pay  their  proportion  of  them  in 
the  character  of  consumers.  In  this  view  they  are  product- 
ive of  inequality  among  the  States,  which  inequality 
would  be  increased  with  the  increased  extent  of  the 
duties." 

And  six  years  later,  when  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
under  Washington,  in  his  famous  report  upon  manufact- 
ures, Mr.  Hamilton  said:  "The  restrictive  regulations, 
which  in  foreign  markets  abridge  the  vent  of  the  increas- 
ing surplus  of  our  agricultural  produce,  serve  to  beget  an 
earnest  desire  that  a  more  extensive  demand  for  the  sur- 
plus may  be  created  at  home.  If  the  system  of  perfect 
liberty  to  industry  and  commerce  were  the  prevailing  sys- 
tem of  nations,  the  arguments  to  dissuade  a  country,  in  the 
predicament  of  the  United  States,  from  the  zealous  pur- 
suit of  manufactures,  would  undoubtedly  have  great  force." 

In  other  words,  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  English  corn 
laws,  which  at  that  time  were  very  nearly  prohibitive, 
excluding- all  our  agricultural  products  from  the  English 
market,  the  arguments  of  the  opponents  to  the  prohibitive 
system  would  have  had  great  force. 

But  England  has  since  seen  the  folly  of  the  restrictive 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  23 

policy,  and  has  opened  her  ports  for  almost  all  of  our  sur- 
plus products  of  agriculture  and  manufacture,  and  the 
conditions  when,  according  to  Mr.  Hamilton,  "  free  trade 
arguments  would  have  great  force,"  have  long  since  been 
created. 

From  this  it  would  undoubtedly  appear  that  Mr.  Ham- 
ilton advocated  protection  more  as  a  defensive  measure 
against  the  restrictive  policy  of  other  nations  than  as  a 
policy  of  bounty  to  the  manufacturer.  If  at  heart  he  was 
an  aristocrat  and  perhaps  a  monarchist,  he  was  conscien- 
tiously so,  believing  that  the  so-called  "better  classes" 
should  rule ;  but  he  was  not  sordid,  and  too  honorable  to 
deliberately  formulate  or  sanction  a  system  with  the 
avowed  object  "  of  cutting  straps  out  of  the  hides  of  the 
poor  for  the  stirrups  of  the  rich." 

Has  it  ever  occurred  to  Mr.  Blaine  that  he  is  one  of 
tliose  persons  who,  according  to  Mr.  Hamilton,  '"imagine 
that  duties  can  never  be  carried  to  extremes,"  and  that, 
consequently,  he  cannot  and  is  not  following  the  princi- 
ples of  the  statesman  whom  he  delights  to  quote  "as  the 
father  of  the  protective  system"? 

After  Hamilton  the  changes  in  the  tariff  were  unim- 
portant, until  1S12  when,  under  the  plea  of  war  necessities, 
the  tariff  on  ii^n  and  cotton  jumped  to  twenty-five  percent 
ad  valorem.  These  duties  were  maintained  withslight  vari- 
ation until  1821,  when  a  further  important  step  toward 
protection  was  made.  It  was  during  the  debates  upon 
this  tariff  that  Daniel  "Webster  said :  "  Look  to  the  his- 
tory of  our  laws  !  Look  at  the  present  state  of  our  laws  ! 
Consider  that  our  whole  revenue,  with  a  trifling  excep- 
tion, is  collected  at  the  custom  house  and  always  has 
been,  and  then  say  what  propriety  there  is  in  calling  on 
the  government  for  protection,  as  if  no  protection  had 


24  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

heretofore  been  afforded.  On  the  general  question  is  the 
doctrine  of  prohibition,  as  a  general  doctrine,  not  prepos- 
terous ?  Suppose  all  nations  to  act  upon  it ;  they  would 
be  prosperous  then,  according  to  this  argument ;  that  is 
precisely  in  the  proportion  in  which  they  abolish  inter- 
course with  one  another.  The  best  apology  for  laws  of 
prohibition  and  laws  of  monopoly  will  be  found  in  that 
state  of  society  not  only  unenlightened  but  sluggish  in 
which  they  are  generally  established.  But  our  age  is 
wholly  of  a  different  character,  and  its  legislation  takes 
another  turn.  Society  is  full  of  excitement;  competition 
comes  in  place  of  monopoly,  and  intelligence  and  indus- 
try ask  only  for  fair  play  and  an  open  field." 

In  referring  to  this  very  tariff  controversy  during 
the  session  of  Congress  from  182?>  to  1824,  Thomas  Ben- 
ton, in  his  memorable  work,  "Thirty  Years  in  the  United 
States  Senate,"  said:  "The  protection  of  domestic  indus- 
try not  being  among  the  granted  powers  was  looked  for 
in  the  incidental,  and  denied  by  the  strict  constructionists 
to  be  a  substantial  power  to  be  exercised  for  the  direct 
purpose  of  protection  ;  but  admitted  by  all  at  that  time 
and  ever  since  the  first  tariff  act  of  1T89  to  be  an  inci- 
dent to  the  revenue-raising  power.  Revenue  the  object, 
protection  the  incident,  had  been  the  rule  of  earlier 
tariffs." 

In  1828  the  duties  were  still  further  increased.  "  The 
tariff  for  1828,"  says  Benton,  "is  an  era  in  our  legislation, 
being  the  event  from  which  the  doctrine  of  '  nullification ' 
takes  its  origin,  and  from  which  a  serious  division  dates 
between  the  North  and  South.  It  was  the  work  of  poli- 
ticians and  manufacturers,  and  was  commenced  for  the 
benefit  of  the  woolen  interest ;  but  like  all  other  bills  of 
this  kind,  it   required  help  from  other  interests  to  get 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  25 

itself  along,  ana  that  help  was  only  to  be  obtained  by 
admitting  other  interests  into  the  benefit  of  the  bill1' — 
or,  what  since  that  time  is  known  by  the  name  of  "  pool- 
ing." 

During  the  debates  upon  this  bill,  Mr.  Rowan,  a  rep- 
resentative from  the  State  of  Kentucky,  said :  "  He  was 
not  opposed  to  the  tariff  as  a  system  of  revenue  honestly 
devoted  to  the  objects  of  revenue ;  on  the  contrary,  he 
was  friendly  to  a  tariff  of  that  character  ;  but,  when  per- 
verted by  the  ambition  of  political  aspirants  and  the 
secret  influence  of  inordinate  cupidity  to  purposes  of  sec- 
tional ascendency,  he  would  not  be  seduced  by  the  capti- 
vation  of  names  or  terms,  however  attractive,  to  lend  it 
his  undivided  support.  It  is  in  vain  to  contend  that  it  is 
called  the  American  system  —  names  do  not  alter  things. 
There  is  but  one  American  system,  and  that  is  delineated 
in  the  State  and  Federal  constitutions.  It  is  the  system 
of  equal  rights  and  privileges,  secured  by  the  representa- 
tive principle  —  a  system  which,  instead  of  subjugating 
the  proceeds  of  the  labor  of  some  to  taxation  with  the 
view  to  enrich  others,  secures  to  all  the  proceeds  of  their 
labor,  and  exempts  all  from  taxation,  except  for  the  support 
of  the  protecting  power  of  the  government.  As  a  sup- 
port necessary  to  the  maintenance  of  the  government  he 
would  support  it, call  it  what  you  please;  as  a  tax  for  any 
other  purpose,  and  especially  for  the  purposes  to  which 
he  had  alluded,  it  had  his  undivided  reprobation,  under 
whatever  name  it  might  assume." 

From  the  adoption  of  this  tariff  also  dates  the  remark- 
able change  of  polic}7  of  the  New  England  States  —  that 
is,  from  free  trade  to  that  of  protection ;  and  from  that 
epoch  also  dates  Mr.  Webster's  singular  conversion  to  the 
protective  system.     From  a  commercial  community  JSTew 


26  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

England  had  become  one  of  manufacturing  enterprises, 
and,  consequently,  selfishness  dictated  a  change  of  policy. 

The  debates  upon  this  bill  of  1828  were  very  bitter; 
the  representatives  of  the  manufacturing  States  and  of 
the  agricultural  States  being  arrayed  against  each  other, 
the  controversy  partook  much  of  a  sectional  character. 
Members  of  the  Southern  States  were  extremely  dissatis- 
fied with  the  bill  which  was  passed  by  the  small  majority  of 
107  against  102  in  the  House,  and  with  but  twenty-three 
to  twent}^-two  votes  in  the  Senate.  The  new  burden 
upon  imports,  they  very  properly  maintained,  fell  upon 
the  producer  of  the  agricultural  exports,  and  tended  to 
enrich  one  section  of  the  Union  at  the  expense  of  the 
other  —  a  proposition  which  has  been  realized  to  the  letter, 
as  will  be  shown  further  on  by  official  statistics.  It  was 
during  this  memorable  debate  that  Mr.  VanBuren  ad- 
dressed the  sagacious  remark  to  the  manufacturers,  "if 
they  suffered  their  interests  to  become  identified  with 
a  political  party  they  would  share  the  fate  of  that  party." 

In  1832  South  Carolina  passed  the  famous  Nullifica- 
tion Act,  and  it  was  not  so  much  the  threat  of  Gen.  Jack- 
son that  he  would  hang  Calhoun  higher  than  Hainan  as 
the  Clay  Compromise  Act  that  subdued  the  rebellious 
spirit.  This  compromise  tariff  contained  the  stipulated 
surrender  of  the  protective  principle;  the  clause  which 
provided  that  after  the  30th  of  September,  1842,  duties 
should  only  be  laid  for  raising  such  revenue  as  might  be 
necessary  for  an  economical  administration  of  the  gov- 
ernment, left  the  question  at  rest  for  ten  years.  In  1837 
the  financial  panic,  the  result  of  wild  speculation,  raged 
all  over  the  land.  The  "Whig  party  successfully  charged 
the  tariff  reduction  with  the  prevailing  distress,  and  thus 
elected  Harrison  and  Tyler  in  1840,  and  two  years  after- 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  27 

ward  the  Whig  tariff  bill,  which  substantial])'  restored 
the  high  duties  of  1824,  was  approved. 

In  1844  Polk  was  elected  President,  and  his  adminis- 
tration constitutes  the  most  remarkable  period  of  tariff 
reform  in  the  history  of  this  country.  Mr.  Polk's  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  Mr.  Walker,  was  a  man  of  extraor- 
dinary force  and  ability,  and  withal  a  sincere  adherent  of 
the  Jefferson ian  school  of  commercial  freedom. 

In  his  whole  intellectual  make-up  he  was  the  exact 
antipode  of  Hamilton.  He  firmly  believed  not  only  in 
the  right  but  in  the  capacity  of  the  people  to  rule.  He 
believed  also  that  the  interests  of  the  few  should  always 
be  subservient  to  the  interests  of  the  many.  In  his  first  an- 
nual report,  Mr.  Walker  laid  down  the  following  princi- 
ples upon  which  his  great  economical  act  was  to  rest : 

"1.  That  no  more  money  should  be  collected  than 
is  necessary  for  the  wants  of  the  government  honestly 
administered. 

"  2.  That  no  duty  be  imposed  on  any  article  above  the 
lowest  rate  which  will  yield  the  largest  amount  of  revenue. 

"3.  That  below  such  a  rate  discrimination  be  made 
descending  in  the  scale  of  duties  or,  f<  >r  imperative  reasons, 
the  articles  may  be  placed  on  the  free  list. 

u4.  That  the  maximum  of  revenue  duties  should  be 
imposed  on  luxuries. 

"  5.  That  all  minimum  and  all  specific  duties  should  be 
abolished  and  ad  valorem  duties  substituted  in  their  place, 
care  being  taken  against  fraudulent  invoices  and  under- 
valuation,  and  to  assess  the  d n ty  upon  the  actual  market 
value. 

"6.  That  the  duty  should  be  so  imposed  as  to  operate 
as  equally  as  possible  throughout  the  Union,  discriminat- 
ing neither  for  nor  against  any  class  or  section." 


28  THE   PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

In  his   remarkable  report,  Mr.  Walker   said :     "  The 
constitutional  power  of  Congress  to  collect  taxes,  duties, 
imposts  and  excises  does  not  authorize  the  laying  of  pro- 
hibitory duty,  or  a  duty  in  which  revenue  is  sacrificed  to 
the  object  of  protecting  the  manufacture  of  the  commodity 
taxed.     Taxation,  whether  direct  or  indirect,  should  be 
as  nearly  as  practicable  in  proportion  to  the  property. 
If  the  whole  revenue  were  raised  by  a  tax  upon  property, 
the'poor  would  pay  a  very  small  portion  of  such  tax;  where- 
as, by  the  consumption  of  imports  or  of  commodities  en- 
hanced i/n  price  under  the  tariff,  thepoor  are  made  to  pay  a 
much  larger  shai^e  than  if  they  were  collected  by  an  assess- 
ment in  proportion  to  property.     The  duties  upon  luxuries 
should  be  lixed  at  the  highest  revenue  standard.     This 
would  not   be  discriminating  in    favor  of   the   poor  but 
would  mitigate  that  discrimination.     A  protective  tariff  is 
a  question    regarding   the  enhancement  of  the  profits  of 
capital,  and  not  the  augmentation  of  the  wages  of  labor. 
It  is  a  question  of  percentage  and  is  to  decide  whether 
money  invested  in  our    manufactories  shall,  by  special 
legislation,  yield  a  profit  of  ten  to  twenty  or  thirty  per  cent, 
or  whether  it  shall  remain  satisfied  with  a  dividend  equal  to 
that  accruing  from  the  same  capital  invested  in  agricult- 
ure, commerce   or   navigation.      It   seems   strange   that 
while  the  profits  of  agriculture  vary  from  one  to  eight 
per  cent,  that  of  manufacture  is  more  than  double.     The 
reason  is  that,  while  high  duties  secure  nearly  a 'monopoly 
of  the  home  market  for  the  manufacturer,  farmers  are,  to 
a  great  extent,  forbidden  to  buy  in  foreign  markets  and 
confined  to  the  home  market  with  prices  enhanced  by  the 
duties.     The  tariff  is  thus  a  double  benefit  to  the  manu- 
facturer and  a  double  loss  to  the  farmer.     Industry  will 
best  thrive  when  let  alone  ;  let  all  international  exchanges 


HISTOKICAL    SKETCH.  29 

of  product  move  as  freely  in  their  orbits  as  the  heavenly 
bodies,  and  their  order  and  harmony  will  be  as  perfect 
and  their  results  as  beneficial  as  in  every  movement 
under  the  laws  of  nature,  when  undisturbed  by  the  errors 
and  influences  of  man." 

The  Walker  tariff  was  adopted  by  the  House  by  a 
large  majority  but  barely  passed  the  Senate ;  that  body, 
in  our  political  system,  then,  as  to-day,  being  antagonistic 
to  all  popular  measures,  not  the  representatives  of  sov- 
ereign States  but  of  privileged  classes. 

The  low-revenue  tariff,  contrary  to  all  the  prophecies 
of  protectionists,  had  the  effect  of  increasing  the  revenue 
to  $46,000,000  annually,  or  $20,000,000  more  than  under 
the  protective  tariff  of  1842,  and  sufficient  to  meet  all  the 
exigencies  of  the  Mexican  War. 

Here  is  what  Prof.  Summer,  of  Yale  College,  a  recog- 
nized authority  in  matters  of  political  economy,  says,  in 
reference  to  the  effect  of  that  tariff : 

"  The  period  from  1S46  to  1860  was  our  period  of  com- 
parative free  trade.  For  an  industrial  history  of  the 
United  States,  no  period  presents  a  greater  interest  than 
this.  It  was  a  period  of  very  great  and  very  solid  pros- 
perity. The  tariff  rates  were  low  and  their  effect  limited. 
It  was  called  a  revenue  tariff  with  incidental  protection. 
The  manufacturers  which,  it  had  been  said,  would  perish, 
did  not  perish  and  did  not  gain  sudden  and  exorbitant 
profits.  They  made  steady  and  genuine  progress.  The 
repeal  of  the  English  corn  laws  in  1846  opened  a  large 
market  for  American  agricultural  products.  The  effect 
on  both  countries  was  most  happy.  It  seemed  as  if  the 
old  system  had  gone  forever,  and  that  these  two  great 
nations,  with  free  industry  and  free  trade,  were  to  pour 
increased  wealth  upon  each  other.     The  fierce  dogmatism 


30  THE    PROTECTIVE    TxVEIFF. 

of  protection  and  its  deeply-rooted  prejudices  seemed  to 
have  received  a  fatal  blow.  Our  shipping  rapidly  in- 
creased. Our  cotton  crops  grew  larger  and  larger.  The 
States,  indeed,  repeated  our  old  currency  follies  and  the 
panic  of  1857  resulted,  but  it  Avas  only  a  stumble  in  a 
career  of  headlong  prosperity.  We  recovered  from  it  in 
a  twelvemonth.  Incidentally,  I  will  add  also  that,  in  the 
administration  of  the  government,  the  period  from  the 
Mexican  to  the  Civil  War  is  our  golden  era,  if  we  have 
any." 

In  the  following  singularly  corroborative  language,  in 
speaking  of  that  period  of  simple  revenue  tariff,  Mr. 
Blaine,  in  his  "  Twenty  Years  in  Congress,"  says :  "  The 
tariff  of  1S4G  was  yielding  abundant  revenue,  and  the 
business  of  the  country  was  in  a  flourishing  condition. 
Money  became  very  abundant  after  the  year  1849 ;  large 
enterprises  were  undertaken,  speculation  was  prevalent, 
and  for  a  considerable  period  the  prosperity  of  the  coun- 
try was  general  and  apparently  genuine.  After  1852  the 
Democrats  had  almost  undisputed  control  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  had  gradually  become  a  free-trade  party.  The 
principles  involved  in  the  tariff  of  1816  seemed  for  the 
time  to  be  so  entirely  vindicated  and  approved'  that  resist- 
ance to  it  ceased,  not  only  among  the  people  but  among 
the  protective  economists  and  even  among  the  manvfact- 
urers  to  a  large  extent.  So  general  was  this  acquiescence 
that  in  1856  a>  protective  tariff  was  not  suggested  or  even 
Ji  inted'  at  hi/  any  one  of  the  three  parties  which  present  <l 
presidential  candidates.  It  was  not  surprising,  there- 
fore, that  in  1857  the  duties  were  placed  lower  than  they 
had  been  since  1812."  Such  eminent  senators  from  New 
England  as  Sumner  and  "Wilson  from  Massachusetts,  Allen 
from  Ehode  Island,  and   Bell  of  New  Hampshire,  sup- 


HISTOKICAL    SKETCH.  31 

ported  the  measure  "  which  was  well  received  by  the 
people." 

Here  we  have  the  testimony  of  the  foremost  repre- 
sentative of  Mr.  Hamilton's  party  of  "generous  income 
and  of  liberal  expenditures,"  describing  in  glowing  terms 
the  general  condition  of  the  country  under  the  simple 
revenue  tariff,  from  1846  to  1861.  Mr.  Blaine  admits  that 
(hiring  that  period  "the  prosperity  of  the  country  was 
general  and  genuine."  That  is  to  say,  that  there  was  re- 
munerative work  for  all  who  wanted  work;  that  there 
was  no  destitution,  no  misery,  and  that  at  that  time  the 
term  starvation  or  starvation  wages  was  not  known ;  that 
the  laborers  of  the  country  were  prosperous  and  satisfied, 
and  had  not  to  resort  to  secret  organizations  and  to  the 
coercive  measures  of  strikes  to  secure  the  just  reward  for 
their  toil,  and  that  such  social  abnormities  as  the  pilgrim- 
age of  hundreds  of  thousands  of  laborers  and  mechanics  in 
search  of  work,  for  whom  the  term  "tramp"  has  since 
been  invented,  were  not  then  even  conceived.  Mr.  Blaine 
does  not  sa}%  but  his  acknowledgment  implies,  that  the 
manufacturers  did  not  make  sudden  and  inordinate  fort- 
unes, but  their  progress  was  steady  and  genuine ;  that 
the  large  expenditures  of  money  by  tariff  lobbyists  in 
Washington  were  then  not  known ;  that  United  States 
senators  and  representatives  did  not  then  grow  sud- 
denly rich  as  now. 

But  Mr.  Blaine's  admissions  are  simply  recorded  here 
as  corroborative  evidence  for  such  as  ignorantly,  or  in  a 
spirit  of  partisan  fanaticism,  are  prone  to  deny  or  refuse 
to  acknowledge  the  truth  of  historical  facts,  simply  be- 
cause they  wish  the  opposite  true. 

After  the  capitulation  of  Milan,  the  Austrian  general 
said  to  General  Bonaparte  that  his  government  would 


32  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

readily  acknowledge  the  French  republic ;  to  which 
Bonaparte  replied:  "The  republic  needs  no  acknowledg- 
ment ;  it  is  as  the  sun ;  blind  are  those  who  do  not  see  it." 
Blind  are  those,  indeed,  who,  in  reading  the  history  of 
this  country  from  184G  to  lsGl^do  not  see  that  it  was  the 
most  glorious,  happy,  or,  as  Prof.  Sumner  better  expresses 
it,  "  the  golden  era  "  of  our  history. 

But  what  was  this  state  of  universal  contentment  to 
the  ambitious  politicians,  who,  thirsting  for  power,  were 
striving  for  supremacy  in  the  Federal  administration  ! 

The  presidential  election  of  1860  was  pending,  and  the 
opportunities  offered  by  the  excited  state  of  public  opin- 
ion on  the  slavery  question  must  be  improved;  the  elec- 
tion of  their  presidential  candidate  must  be  made  certain, 
even  at  the  dishonorable  expedient  of  bribing  a  whole 
State  that  had  heretofore  been  steadily  opposed  to  the 
Hamilton ian  party. 

"The  question  of  the  tariff,"  says  Mr.  Blaine,  on  page 
204,  vol.  I  of  his  work,  "  was  of  special  significance 
and  influence  in  Pennsylvania.  Important  in  that  State, 
it  had  become  important  everywhere.  Pennsylvania  had 
been  continually  and  tenaciously  held  by  the  Democratic 
party.  In  the  old  political  divisions,  she  had  followed 
Jefferson  and  opposed  Adams.  In  the  new  division  she 
had  followed  Jackson  and  opposed  Clay.  She  was  Dem- 
ocratic as  against  Federalists,  she  was  Democratic  as 
against  Whigs.  From  the  election  of  Jackson-in  182S  to 
the  year  1860,  a  period  that  measured  the  lifetime  of  a 
generation,  she  had,  with  very  few  exceptions,  sustained 
the  Democratic  party.  .  .  .  Disassociated  from  the  ques- 
tion of  protection,  opposition  to  the  extension  of  slavery 
was  a  weak  issue  in  Pennsylvania.  ...  It  was  this  con- 
dition of  public  opinion  in  Pennsylvania  which  made  the 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  33 

recognition  of  the  protective  s}Tstem  so  essential  in  the 
Chicago  platform  of  18G0.  It  was  to  that  recognition  that 
Mr.  Lincoln,  in  the  end,  owed  his  election.  .  .  .  Had  the 
Republicans  failed  to  carry  the  State  election,  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  Mr.  Lincoln  would  have  been  defeated. 
An  adverse  result  in  Pennsylvania  in  October  would  cer- 
tainly have  involved  the  loss  of  Indiana  in  November, 
beside  California  and  Oregon  and  the  four  votes  in  New 
Jersey.  ...  In  reviewing  the  agencies,  therefore,  which 
precipitated  the  political  revolution  of  I860,  large  con- 
sideration must  be  given  to  the  influence  of  the  movent*  nt 
for  protection" 

An  honest  confession  is  balm  to  the  soul.  The  con- 
spiracy of  the  friends  of  his  party  to  undermine  and 
break  up  a  fiscal  system  which,  for  the  previous  fifteen 
years,  had  given  "general  and  genuine  prosperity  to  the 
country,"  could  not  possibly  be  exposed  more  forcibly  or 
more  frankly.  Let  us  play  Joshua,  they  said;  let  us 
stop  the  sun,  who,  heretofore,  threw  his  warming  rays 
equally  over  all,  whose  light  diffused  contentment  and 
happiness  among  the  rich  and  the  poor  alike ;  let  these 
blessings  be  hereafter  monopolized  by  a  few  of  us,  and 
let  us  make  hay  as  long  as  we  can  keep  this  sun  standing 
still. 

How  well  this  conspiracy  succeeded  is  matter  of 
recent  history.  The  war  with  all  its  untold  horrors 
for  the  people  and  its  splendid  opportunities  for  the 
heartless  jobber  and  political  adventurer  was  the  imme- 
diate consequence;  it  cut  the  golden  thread  which  was 
guiding  the  American  people  into  even  and  lasting  pros- 
perity. 

At  the  first  sign  of  the  coming  trouble,  when  the  eyes 
of  the  people  were  turned  in  another  direction  and  steadily 


34  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

fixed  upon  the  endangered  flag  of  the  country,  the 
agents  of  special  interests  tilled  the  congressional  Lobbies, 
urging,  cajoling  and  threatening  the  representatives  into 
passing  bills  to  protect  this,  that  and  the  other  manufact- 
ured commodities,  of  course,  all  under  the  patriotic  pre- 
tense of  providing  the  government  with  ample  revenue 
for  impending  emergencies.  Patriotism  ran  exceedingly 
high  in  those  days,  and  the  most  enthusiastic  brawlers  for 
an  "  immediate  advance  upon  Richmond,"  were  ready 
and  more  than  willing  "that  all  their  relatives  should  be 
sacrificed  upon  the  altar  of  liberty."  But,  of  course,  some 
one  had  to  stay  behind  to  see  that  the  boys  in  blue  at 
the  front  be  well  supplied  with  clothing  and  provisions ; 
especially  clothing,  because  it  is  well  known  that  the 
cold,  raw  climate  of  the  South  required  a  great  deal  of 
that.  And,  as  the  Frenchman  says,  "eating  brings  appe- 
tite," so  the  manufacturers'  appetite  increased  as  the  prof- 
itable effect  of  protection  was  enjoyed ;  upon  their 
demand,  accordingly,  one  act  after  another  was  passed, 
enhancing  the  duties  upon  imports  until  all  foreign  com- 
petition was  barred  out,  and  they  could,  with  perfect 
impunity,  unload  their  shoddy  wares,  at  high  prices,  upon 
the  government. 

It  was  then  that  the  flag  and  an  appropriation  states- 
man appeared  upon  the  political  stage,  and  low  cunning- 
took  the  place  of  statesmanship. 

The  country  was  in  danger,  and  the  patriotic  people 
of  the  North  were  ready  for  any  sacrifice ;  but,  while  the 
generous  youth  of  the  nation  responded  with  alacrity  to 
the  President's  call  "for  three  hundred  thousand  more," 
the  representatives  of  special  interests  from  Pennsyl- 
vania and  the  New  England  States  rushed  from  their 
seats  in  Congress,   with  the  American  flag  in  one  hand 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  35 

and  with  a  tariff  bill  in  the  other,  crying :  "  Give  !  Give! 
Save  the  Union !  Save  the  Union !  But  give."  And  they 
did  give. 

The  protectionists  had  taken  time  by  the  forelock, 
and,  while  the  tariff,  known  as  the  Morrill  Act,  was 
not,  as  is  generally  supposed,  a  war  measure,  it  was  sug- 
gested by  political  exigencies.  It  was  adopted  in  the 
House  during  the  session  from  1859  to  1860,  just  previous 
to  the  election  of  Mr.  Lincoln,  but  did  not  pass  the  Senate 
until  the  next  session.  It  was  intended,  as  claimed  by 
Mr.  Morrill,  to  restore  the  rates  of  1S46  which,  by  the 
act  of  185 7,  had  been  greatly  reduced.  The  real  motive, 
however,  which  actuated  the  great  statesmen  from  the 
New  England  States  and  their  political  cooperators  from 
Pennsylvania,  as  confessedly  admitted  by  Mr.  Blaine, 
was  to  create  Republican  sentiment  in  Pennsylvania. 
With  the  exception  of  the  rates  on  iron  and  wool,  which 
were  raised  considerably,  and  numerous  changes  from 
value  rates  to  specific  duties,  by  which  the  rates  were 
surreptitiously  increased,  the  Morrill  tariff  did  not  mate- 
rially differ  from  the  Walker  tariff  of  1846. 

In  Jul}r,  18J32,  two  consecutive  acts  were  passed  rais- 
ing the  duties  to  thirty-two  per  cent  in  the  average,  and 
in  June  and  August,  1864,  these  were  increased  to  forty- 
seven  per  cent,  and  these  are,  with  but  slight  modifica- 
tion, the  tariff  rates  of  to-day. 

"  The  result  of  this  legislation,"  said  Tax  Commissioner 
Wells,  "is  a  tariff  which  is  unjust  and  unequal  ;  which 
needlessly  enhances  prices;  which  takes  far  more  indi- 
rectly from  the  people  than  is  received  into  the  treasury  ; 
which  renders  an  exchange  of  domestic  commodities  for 
foreign  commodities  nearly  impossible;  which  necessitates 
the  continual  exportation  of  obligations  of  national   in- 


36  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

debtee! ness  and  of  the  precious  metals,  and  which,  while 
professing  to  protect  American  industries,  discriminates 
against  them." 

At  the  close  of  the  war  the  internal  revenue  taxes  were 
to  a  great  extent  swept  away,  but  any  reduction  of  the 
taxes  on  imports  was  steadily  resisted  by  the  members  of 
Congress  representing  special  interests,  and,  as  monopolies 
always  secure  the  best  intellects  available,  superior  brains 
and  personal  influence  were  on  their  side.  However,  the 
demand  for  a  reduction  of  the  war  taxes  had  grown  so 
strong  in  the  Western  States  that  the  representatives 
from  that  section  of  the  country,  irrespective  of  party, 
insisted  upon  some  legislation. 

In  1867  an  effort  at  reduction  of  tariff  rates  came 
very  near  being  successful.  Mr.  David  A.  Wells,  then 
special  commissioner  of  revenue,  with  the  sanction  of 
the  secretary  of  the  treasury,  Mr.  McCulloch,  had  a  bill 
'prepared  reducing  the  duties  on  raw  material,  etc.,  which 
passed  the  Senate  with  the  handsome  majority  of  twenty- 
seven  to  ten,  and  the  House  with  a  not  less  significant 
majority  of  106  to  64,  or,  but  a  few  votes  less  than  the 
two-thirds  necessary  to  a  suspension  of  the  rules.  This 
unfortunate  event  defeated  the  bill,  and  for  three  years 
ended  all  attempts  at  tariff  reform. 

As  the  money  continued  to  accumulate  in  the  treas- 
ury, the  people's  demand  for  lessening  their  burdens 
could  no  longer  be  resisted.  In  1870  the  duty' on  simple 
revenue  articles,  such  as  tea,  cdffee,  sugar,  molasses  and 
spices,  was  lowered,  and  in  1872  coffee  and  tea  were  put 
upon  the  free  list.  It  must  not  be  supposed,  however, 
that  this  was  acceded  to  as  a  concession;  it  was  but  a 
strategic  movement  on  the  part  of  the  protectionists,  sim- 
ilar to  the  one  now  being  proposed  by  Mr.  Randall  for  a 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  37 

repeal  of  t^e  taxes  on  whisky  and  tobacco,  and  with  a 
similar  design.  By  cutting  off  all  revenue  from  internal 
taxation,  they  shrewdly  calculated  any  reduction  of  tariff 
taxes  would  become  impossible.  The  lack  of  public  spirit 
and  patriotism  among  the  advocates  of  protection  was  as 
apparent  then  as  now,  when  the  fact  is  considered  that  all 
the  taxes  collected  upon  whisky  and,  tobacco  and  upon 
such  articles  of  general  consumption  as  arc  not  produced 
in  the  United  States  go  into  the  treasury,  while  the 
taxes  upon  foreign  manufactures,  which  restrict  the 
importation  of  foreign  articles,  and,  consequently,  increase 
the  price  of  the  home  product,  eventually  flow  into  the 
pockets  of  private  individuals,  or,  as  we  shall  hereafter 
have  occasion  to  show,  are  wasted  and  lost  in  the  shuffle. 
By  this  act  of  187:3  the  duty  on  salt,  which  had  en- 
riched the  salt  operators  in  Syracuse  and  Saginaw,  was 
reduced  one-half,  and  the  duty  on  coal,  which  had  been 
$1.25  a  ton,  was  reduced  to  seventy -five  cents.  It  also 
made  a  horizontal  reduction  of  ten  per  cent  upon  manu- 
factures of  cotton,  wool,  iron,  paper,  glass  and  leather ; 
but  three  years  later,  in  1ST5,  this  act  was  repealed  as 
far  as  import  taxes  were  concerned.  In  this  connec- 
tion it  will  be  remembered  that  Mr.  Morrison,  of  Illinois, 
in  1880  proposed  an  exactly  similar  reduction.  But  what 
had  been  commented  on  by  the  public  press  as  wise  and 
patriotic,  when  introduced  and  recommended  by  M< 
Dawes  and  Blaine,  was  denounced  as  erratic,  unbusiness- 
like and  impractical  when  proposed  by  Mr.  Morrison.  It 
makes  all  the  difference  in  the  world  to  the  partisan  what 
party  label  a  reformer  is  wearing. 

After  1875  repeated  but  ineffectual  attempts  were 
made  by  Mr.  Morrison  to  have  the  tariff  reduced,  but  by 
shrewd  and  unscrupulous  management  the  party  of  Jef- 


429000 


38  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

ferson  became  divided  on  the  tariff  issue,  and  Mr.  Randall, 
a  Pennsylvania  protectionist,  having  been  elected  Speaker 
of  the  House,  organized  the  committee  against  Mr.  Morri- 
son and  his  friends,  and  in  the  interest  of  protectionism. 

However,  Banquo's  ghost  would  not  down.  But  mem- 
bers of  Congress,  representing  special  interests  or  lacking 
the  courage  of  honest  convictions  or  too  ignorant  to  master 
the  subject,  did  for  a  time  succeed  in  preventing  the  con- 
sideration and  discussion  of  this  question.  Newspapers 
were  subsidized  by  monopolies  owing  their  wealth  to  this 
system,  but  the  independent  and  consequently  most 
influential  portion  of  the  public  press  was  determined 
that  public  sentiment  regarding  the  tariff  should  not  be 
permitted  to  die  out,  and  continued  unceasingly  to  "  agi- 
tate." In  1882  this  sentiment  had  taken  definite  shape  and 
the  cry  of  alarm  was  already  heard  all  along  the  line  of 
the  "disturbed  industries." 

When  it  became  apparent  to  the  representatives  of  the 
protected  industries  that  the  popular  demand  for  a  reduc- 
tion of  taxes  could  no  longer  be  disregarded,  or  its  consid- 
eration postponed,  Mr.  Sherman,  the  principal  representa- 
tive of  the  woolen  interest,  and  his  assistants  of  the  pro- 
tective school,  resolved  to  take  matters  by  the  forelock 
and  master  the  situation.  If  we  must  have  changes  and 
modifications,  they  said,  let  us  do  the  changing  and  modi- 
fying ourselves.  The  representatives  of  the  people,  it  was 
thought,  might  be  competent  to  increase  the  rates  on  im- 
ports but  could  not  be  trusted  with  the  important  and 
difficult  task  of  revising  and  simplifying  the  tariff  with 
the  view  to  reduction.  Such  momentous  labors  could 
only  properly  be  performed  by  men  of  experience  and 
experts  in  the  various  industrial  branches ! 

It  was,  therefore,  thought  judicious   to  remove  the 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  39 

question  from  the  halls  of  Congress,  to  prevent  the  matter 
from  being  openly  discussed,  and  the  iniquities  of  the  pre- 
vailing tariff  laid  bare  to  the  eyes  of  the  whole  country. 
Consequently,  a  commission  composed  of  "  practical  men  " 
was  resolved  upon,  which  would  investigate  the  whole 
matter  and  formulate  a  tariff.  Mr.  Sherman  has  great 
faith  in  the  efficacy  of  commissions!  Was  it  not  a  com- 
mission which,  in  1870,  saved  the  United  States  govern- 
ment from  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  party  of  "  stinted 
revenue  and  restricted  expenditure  "  ? 

The  appointment  of  that  commission  was  opposed  up- 
on the  floor  of  Congress  by  every  friend  of  popular  gov- 
ernment, and  by  every  honest  advocate  of  tariff  reform. 

The  Hon.  Poindexter  Dunn,  a  representative  from 
Arkansas,  upon  this  occasion  thus  tersely  and  truthfully 
characterized  the  movement:  "  I  am  opposed  to  this  bill 
because  I  believe  it  to  be  unconstitutional  in  its  spirit  and 
purpose,  unnecessary,  in  fact,  and  strategic,  cunning  and 
evasive  in  its  motives.  I  believe  it  is  full  of  mystery  and 
iufffflerv,  unseen  results  and  delusions.  The  advocates  of 
the  bill  proceed  entirely  upon  the  theory  that  we  now 
have  a  tariff  system  so  complex,  so  mysterious  and  so 
'  wonderfully  and  fearfully  made '  that  the  ordinary  legis- 
lative mind  can  no  longer  be  trusted  to  deal  or  tamper 
with  it.  It  is,  therefore,  proposed  to  create  this  commission 
of  '  wise  men  from  the  East,'  to  whom  we  are  to  delegate, 
not,  indeed,  the  absolute  power  to  enact  a  law  but,  cer- 
tainly, the  power  to  substantially  formulate  legislation. 
We  are  told  now  that  we  do  not  know  enough  to  formu- 
late the  needed  tariff  legislation,  and,  'by  the  same  token,' 
as  soon  as  this  commission  shall  have  reported,  we  shall 
be  told  that  we  are  not  capable  of  reviewing,  revising  or 
iu  any  wise  changing,  altering  or  amending  such  bill  as 


40  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

they  may  see  proper  to  recommend  to  us.  Therefore,  it 
amounts  substantially  to  a  delegation  of  the  power  '  to  lay 
and  collect  taxes,  duties,  imposts  and  excises1;  and  this 
power  is  given  by  the  Constitution  to  Congress  and  can- 
not be  delegated  by  Congress,  directly  or  indirectly,  to 
any  other  tribunal,  commission  or  other  bod}r.  The  Con- 
stitution further  most  explicitly  requires  that  'all  bills  for 
raising  revenue  shall  originate  in  the  House  of  Represent- 
atives.' By  the  terms  of  this  bill, '  a  bill  to  raise  revenue ' 
will  originate  in  this  '  tariff  commission,'  and  be  passed 
through  the  House  as  a  matter  of  form.  So  jealous  were 
the  people  of  this  power  of  taxation  in  the  early  days  that 
they  would  not  even  allow  the  Senate  to  originate  a  rev- 
enue bill,  but  limited  that  power  to  the  House  composed 
of  the  immediate  representatives  of  the  people.  It  is  this 
very  power  to  '  originate  bills  raising  revenue '  that  is  pro- 
posed to  be  delegated  to  this  commission.  How  can  rep- 
resentatives, who  are  usually  jealous  of  the  powers  and 
privileges  of  this  House,  reconcile  their  consciences  to  vote 
for  this  measure  % " 

.But  Mr.  Dunn's  was  a  voice  lost  in  the  wilderness. 
The  bill  passed  and  the  commission  was  appointed  by  the 
President.  That  commission  was  "  to  take  into  considera- 
tion and  thoroughly  investigate  all  the  various  questions 
relating  to  the  agricultural,  commercial,  mercantile,  manu- 
facturing, mining  and  industrial  interests  of  the  United 
States,  so  far  as  the  same  may  be  necessary  to  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  judicious  tariff,  etc.,  etc.,  upon  a  scale  of 
justice  to  all  industries,"  etc.,  etc.  After  eight  months' 
thorough-  examination,  the  commission  submitted  their 
report  to  Congress. 

It  will  be  seen,  of  the  various  interests  the  commis- 
sion was  to  take  into  consideration  "  for  the  establishment 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  41 

of  a  tariff  upon  a  scale  of  justice  to  all  interests,"  that  of 
agriculture  was  mentioned  first.  But  after  a  careful 
perusal  of  the  voluminous  report,  it  is  found  this  inter- 
est, more  important  than  all  the  other  interests  combined, 
was  neither  thoroughly  nor  even  superficially  considered  ; 
unless  the  farcical  recommendation  amounts  to  such  con- 
sideration, "  that  a  duty  of  one  cent  a  pound  be  placed 
on  beef  and  pork,  two  cents  on  hams  and  bacon,  four 
cents  on  butter  and  butterine,  two  cents  on  lard,  twenty 
cents  on  a  bushel  of  wheat,  fifteen  cents  on  rye  and  barley, 
ten  cents  on  corn,  ten  cents  on  oats,"  etc.,  which  products 
we  do  not  import  but  export  in  large  quantities ;  or  the 
increasing  of  the  tax  on  raw  wool,  rice,  sugar  and 
tobacco,  which  may  affect  the  interests  of  a  few  farmers 
in  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania  and  a  handful  of  planters  in 
the  South. 

We  have  also  searched  in  vain  through  the  pages  of 
this  report  for  a  ''thorough  consideration"  of  the  interests 
of  more  than  six  million  persons  who,  in  18S0,  were  em- 
ployed in  rendering-  professional  and  personal  service  and 
in  trade  and  transportation.  The  report  conclusively 
shows,  that  the  interests  the  tariff  commission  felt  itself 
called  upon  to  exclusively  consider,  were  the  interests  of 
the  comparatively  small  number  of  individuals  and  cor- 
porations engaged  in  manufacture  and  mining,  and  that 
the  act  creating  the  commission  misstated  the  real  object. 
It  ought  to  have  read  :  "An  act  for  the  purpose  of  taking 
into  consideration  the  manufacturing,  mining,  wool,  sugar 
and  rice  interests,  with  a  view  to  establishing  a  tariff 
for  the  fair  distribution  among  these  interests,  of  the 
whole  plunder  realized  through  this  system." 

In  its  report,  the  commission  substantially  admits  this 
construction.  "  Early  in  its  deliberations,"  they  say,  "  the 


42  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

commission  became  convinced  that  a  substantial  recU  J;  ion 
of  tariff  duties  was  demanded.  Such  a  reduction  of  the 
existing  tariff  the  commission  regarded  as  a  measure  of 
justice  to  consumers.  Excessive  duties,  or  those  above 
such  standard  of  equalization,  are  positively  injurious  to 
the  interest  which  they  are  supposed  to  benefit.  They  en- 
courage the  investment  of  capital  in  manufacturing  enter- 
prises by  rash  and  unskilled  speculators,  to  be  followed 
by  disaster  to  the  adventurers  and  their  employes,  and  a 
plethora  of  commodities  which  derange  the  operations 
of  skilled  and  prudent  enterprise.  Numerous  examples 
of  such  disasters  and  derangements  occurred  during  and 
after  the  excessively  protective  period  of  the  late  war.  Ex- 
cessive duties,  generally,  or  exceptionally  high  duties,  in 
particular  cases,  discredit  our  whole  national  economic  sys- 
tem, and  furnish  plausible  argument  for  its  complete  sub- 
version." 

Who  are  the  consumers,  who  as  the  commission  im- 
plies, have  suffered  from  the  injustice  of  excessively  pro- 
tective duties?  Is  it  not  the  farmer  and  the  numerous 
classes  of  our  population  whose  interests  were  overlooked 
by  that  commission?  In  a  very  few  and  plain  words  the 
commission  admits  the  whole  case  of  the  tariff  reformers. 
They  fully  agree  with  the  commission,  that  the  excessive 
duties  prevailing  for  the  last  twenty-three  years  have 
been  "  positively  injurious  to  the  interests  they  are  sup- 
posed to  benefit";  "that  they  have  been  the  cause  of  dis- 
asters and  derangements  "  through  which  the  country  has 
suffered  untold  miseries,  and  that,  as  a  measure  of  justice 
to  the  consumers,  "  a  substantial  reduction  of  the  tariff 
rates  is  demanded."  But  while  these  views  were  the 
"  early  convictions  "  of  the  commissioners,  and  while  they 
had  claimed  that  the  result  of  their  labors  would  be  a  re- 


HISTOBIGAL    SKETCH.  43 

duction  of  from  twenty  to  twenty-five  per  cent  in  the 
average,  the  actual  decrease  was  a  little  over  four  per 
cent,  and  in  many  instances  the  rates  were  increased. 

Their  schemes  to  gain  time  to  bridge  over  the  present 
difficulty  and  to  appease  the  popular  clamor  succeeded 
admirably.  The  people  became  tired.  They  had  been 
betrayed  in  the  houses  of  their  friends.  The  commission, 
composed  of  interested  parties,  merely  completed  the 
work  mapped  out  for  them,  viz. :  to  defeat  every  attempt 
to  enact  a  "  measure  of  justice  to  the  consumers." 

The  Chicago  Trihune,  in  commenting  upon  the 
lamentable  outcome  of  their  labor,  said :  "  The  tariff  com- 
mission was  not  organized  for  any  equitable  or  just  pur- 
pose. It  was  organized  to  promote  certain  specific  inter- 
ests. The  few  members  who  took  part  in  it  with  a  view 
to  equalize  the  tariff  were  a  minority.  The  woolen  man- 
ufacturers had  a  specific  object  which,  to  them,  over- 
shadows all  other  considerations,  and  they  were  allowed 
to  have  their  own  way.  In  return  the  iron  ore  and  steel 
interest  was  allowed  to  frame  a  tariff  to  suit  itself.  So 
with  the  sugar  planter,  the  cotton  manufacturers,  the 
glass  and  pottery  interests.  The  result  was  a  bill  in 
which  the  idea  of  a  genera]  revision  of  the  tariff  was 
ignored.  In  the  Senate,  under  the  lead  of  Sherman,  it 
was  able,  by  log-rolling  with  the  lumber  men  and  others, 
seriously  to  increase  the  iron  and  steel  tariff,  to  the  dis- 
gust of  all  conservative  members. 

A  tariff  commission  composed  of  extreme  partisans, 
each  looking  mainly  to  the  advancement  of  some  special 
interest,  could  hardly  be  expected  to  frame  a  just  or  Avise 
bill,  and  the  abortion  produced  by  the  commission  failed, 
as  a  matter  of  course,  to  meet  the  expectations  of  the 
country," 


44  THE    PROTECTIVE    TAKIFF. 

The  fact  is,  the  commission  had  but  one  idea,  and 
that  was  to  make  "  protection  "  the  object  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  revenue  subordinate  to  "  protection."  "  The 
inside  history  of  the  tariff  commission,"  pertinently 
continues  the  Tribune,  "is  coming  out  from  day  to 
day.  It  was  believed  from  the  first  that  the  commis- 
sion was  packed  in  the  interest  of  monopoly.  It  was 
known  that  two  of  the  commissioners  represented  the 
woolen  interests ;  one,  the  iron  and  steel  interests ;  one, 
the  sugar  interests ;  one,  Mr.  Kenner,  ultra-protection  and  a 
high-tariff  man  generally.  When  a  letter  was  published 
some  months  ago  from  Mr.  Eobert  P.  Porter,  it  was  sus- 
pected that  the  commission,  instead  of  gathering  infor- 
mation impartially  as  it  traveled  through  the  country, 
was  really  engaged  in  drumming  up  one-sided  testimony 
to  '  boom '  in  favor  of  high  tariff.  This  theory  has  been 
confirmed  by  additional  letters  which  were  written  dur- 
ing the  existence  of  the  commission  by  both  Porter  and 
Kenner.  Mr.  Porter  was  proxy  for  Pig-iron  Kelly  on  the 
commission.  His  letters  to  Kelly  attest  that  he  was 
working  to  secure  harmony  among  the  commissioners  in 
favor  of  maintaining  ultra  and  excessive  duties,  and  he  was 
able  to  report  to  his  principal  at  last,  that  'There  was  an 
evident  desire  on  the  part  of  the  commissioners  to  take 
matters  into  their  own  hands  and  push  them  through.' 
His  letter  shows  that  he  was  encouraging  the  manufact- 
urers and  their  representatives  everywhere  to  come  for- 
ward and  either  crowd  out  or  overwhelm  any  person  who 
might  volunteer  to  speak  in  behalf  of  the  people.  He 
was  doing  the  work  for  which  he  received  his  appoint- 
ment, and  reported,  from  time  to  time,  to  Pig-iron  Kelly, 
just  as  if  the  latter  had  made  up  the  commission,  and 
without   taking  any   notice   of   the   government  which 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  45 

appointed  it  or  the  people  in  whose  interest  it  was  osten- 
sibly created." 

The  case  is  much  better  stated  by  the  Tribune  than  I 
could  state  it.  The  excessive  and  exceptionally  high  duties 
remain  substantially  in  the  condition  which  called  forth 
the  remarkable  declaration  of  the  tariff  commission  that 
these,  to-wit,  high  duties  "  discredit  our  whole  national 
economic  system  and  furnish  plausible  argument  for  its 
complete  subversion." 

The  recent  unsuccessful  attempt  of  Congressman  Mor- 
rison to  do  what  the  commission  conscientiously  believed 
was  a  "measure  of  justice  to  consumers,"  is  too  fresh  in 
the  memory  of  all  to  require  repetition.  In  fact,  the  less 
said  about  that  disgraceful  episode,  the  better  for  the 
good  name  of  our  representative  government.  The 
eastern  magnates,  conscious  of  the  efficacy  of  immense 
wealth,  accumulated  under  this  system  of  governmental 
subsidies,  having  grown  impudent  and  aggressive,  were 
fully  determined  to  check  in  its  incipiency  every  effort  to 
reduce  the  exorbitant  tariff  taxes.  Their  representatives 
in  Congress,  having  received  instructions  to  stifle  any 
movement  which  would  lead  to  a  discussion  of  this  ques- 
tion, and  the  cooperation  of  some  thirty  members  from 
the  ranks  of  the  people's  representatives,  too  stupid  or 
too  ignorant  to  comprehend  the  situation,  having  been 
secured,  they  sneeringly  defied  this  honest  advocate  of 
the  people's  interests  from  Illinois  to  bring  forth  his 
measure  of  justice  to  the  consumers. 

Their  programme  was  carried  out  to  the  letter,  and  for 
the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  republic,  the  disgrace- 
ful spectacle  of  a  parliamentary  muzzle  placed  upon  the 
mouth  of  the  Chairman  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Commit- 
tee was  witnessed. 


46  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

This  brief  historical  sketch  cannot  he  more  fittingly 
closed  than  by  the  following  lucid  and  candid  statement 
of  Secretary  Manning  in  his  treasury  report  of  1885. 

"Beside  the  reforms  which  are  desirable  for  the 
effective  administration  of  any  system  of  taxation  levied 
through  imported  merchandise  and  are  indispensable  for 
the  administration  of  custom  laws  which,  like  our  own, 
are  a  chaos  rather  than  a  system,  I  venture  to  hope  that 
in  due  season  it  will  be  the  pleasure  of  Congress  to  con- 
sider some  other  reforms,  upon  which,  as  is  requisite,  all 
parties  may  agree,  and  that  are  of  a  different  scope.  Like 
our  currency  laws,  our  tariff  laws  are  a  legacy  of  war.  If 
exigencies  excuse  their  origin,  their  defects  are  unneces- 
sary after  twenty  }rears  of  peace.  They  have  been  re- 
tained without  sifting  and  discrimination,  although  en- 
acted without  legislative  debate,  criticism  or  explana- 
tion. A  horizontal  reduction  of  ten  per  cent  was  made 
in  1872,  but  was  repealed  in  1875,  and  rejected  in  1884. 
They  require  at  our  custom  house  the  employment  of  a 
force  sufficient  to  examine,  appraise  and  levy  duties  upon 
more  than  4,182  different  articles.  Many  rates  of  duty 
begun  in  war  have  been  increased  since,  although  the  late 
tariff  commission  declared  them  'injurious  to  the  inter- 
ests supposed  to  be  benefited,'  and  said  that  a  'reduction 
would  be  conducive  to  the  general  prosperit}r.'  They 
have  been  retained,  although  the  long  era  of  falling 
prices,  in  the  case  of  specific  duties,  has  operated  a 
large  increase  of  rates.  They  have  been  retained  at 
an  average  ad  valorem  rate  for  the  last  year  of 
over  forty-six  per  cent,  which  is  but  two  and  a  half 
per  cent  less  than  the  highest  rate  of  the  war  period, 
and  is  nearly  four  per  cent  more  than  the  rate  before 
the  late  revision.     The  highest  endurable  rates  of  duty 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH.  47 

which  were  adopted  in  1862-4  to  offset  internal  taxes 
upon  almost  every  taxable  article,  have  in  most  cases 
been  retained  now  from  fourteen  to  twenty  years  after 
every  such  internal  tax  has  been  removed.  They  have 
been  retained  while  purely  revenue  duties  upon  articles 
not  competing  with  anything  produced  in  the  thirty-eight 
States  have  been  discarded.  They  have  been  retained  upon 
articles  used  as  materials  for  our  own  manufactures  (in 
18S4  adding  $30,000,000  to  their  cost)  which,  if  exported, 
compete  in  other  countries  against  similar  manufacturers 
from  untaxed  materials.  Some  rates  have  been  retained 
after  ruining  the  industries  they  were  meant  to  advantage. 
Other  rates  have  been  retained  after  effecting  a  higher 
price  for  a  domestic  product  at  home  than  it  was  sold 
abroad  for.  The  general  high  level  of  rates  has  been  re- 
tained on  the  theory  of  countervailing  lower  wages  abroad^ 
when,  in  fact,  the  higher  wages  of  American  labor  is  at 
once  the  secret  and  the  security  of  our  capacity  to  distance 
all  competition  from  ''pauper  labor"*  in  any  market.  All 
changes  have  left  unchanged  or  changed  for  the  worse, 
by  new  schemes  of  classification  and  otherwise,  a 
complicated,  cumbrous,  intricate  group  of  laws  which 
are  not  capable  of  being  administered  with  impar- 
tiality to  all  our  merchants.  As  nothing  in  the  ordi- 
nary course  of  business  is  imported  unless  the  price  here 
of  the  domestic  as  well  as  the  imported  article  is 
higher  by  the  amount  of  the  duty  and  the  cost  of  sea- 
transit  than  the  price  abroad,  the  preference  of  the 
taxpayer  for  duties  upon  articles  not  produced  in  the 
United  States  is  justified  by  the  fact  that  such  duties 
cost  him  no  more  than  the  treasury  of  his  country  gets. 
As  for  duties  affecting  articles  that  are  also  produced 
in  the  United  States,  the  first  to  be  safely  discarded  are 


48  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

those  upon  materials  used  by  our  own  manufacturers, 
which  now  subject  them  to  a  hopeless  competition,  at 
home  and  abroad,  with  the  manufacturing  nations,  none 
of  which  taxes  raw  materials.  It  is  not  to  be  doubted 
that  in  any  reform  which  shall  finally  receive  the 
approval  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress,  they  will 
maturely  consider  and  favorably  regard  the  interests 
which  can  only  gradually  and  carefully  be  adjusted, 
without  loss,  to  changes  in  the  legislative  conditions 
for  their  advancing  prosperity." 

Secretary  Manning  has  placed  this  whole  protective 
theory  in  a  nutshell,  and  unless  its  advocates  can  success- 
fully refute  his  deductions,  "that  high-priced  labor  can 
distance  '  pauper  labor '  in  any  market,"  that  theory 
is  reduced  to  a  demand  for  an  increase  of  the  profits  of 
capital,  a  proposition  without  the  shadow  of  justification, 
either  in  law  or  in  equity. 


THE  GENERAL  EFFECT   OF   THE  PEOTECTIVE 

SYSTEM. 


MR.  BLAINE,  in  the  first  volume  of  his  "  Twenty 
Years  in  Congress,"  says:  "The  people  of  this 
country,  under  the  protective  system,  are  in  a  more  pros- 
perous condition  than  that  of  any  other  country." 

And  again  : 

On  page  211,  vol.  I,  of  his  work,  he  makes  the 
other  singular  statement  that  "  It  is  the  enjoyment 
of  free  trade  and  protection  at  the  same  time  which  has 
contributed  to  the  unexampled  development  and  marvel- 
ous prosperity  of  the  United  States." 

Mr.  Blaine's  first  proposition  that  the  American  people 
are  more  prosperous  than  the  people  of  any  other  coun- 
try is  not  to  be  questioned,  and  seems  wholly  gratuitous 
when  the  facts  are  considered  that  the  American  people 
have  been  favored  by  greater  natural  advantages  than 
the  people  of  any  other  country ;  that  they  were  given 
an  entire  new  continent,  in  extent  as  large  as  the  whole 
of  Europe,  with  endless  and  inexhaustible  natural  wealth 
and  resources,  and,  above  all,  that  they  were  blessed 
with  institutions  which  offered  opportunities  for  free 
individual  and  aggregate  development  never  before 
offered  to  mankind.  But  when,  in  the  face  of  his  former 
admission  of  the  grand  results  attained  under  the  low 
tariff  system,  he  presumes  to  convey  the  impression 
among  his  countrymen  that  the  results  of  these  divine 
blessings  are  due  to  the  protective  system,  the  soundness 
of  his  arguments  ma}r  freely  be  questioned. 

49 


50  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF 

As  to  his  second  statement,  it  is  well  known  that 
the  free  trade  system  has  prevailed  between  the 
States  of  the  American  Union  ever  since  the  formation 
of  the  government,  and  its  wonderful  results  stand  out  in 
bold  relief  as  the  most  powerful  argument  against  the 
restrictive  system  advocated  by  Mr.  Blaine,  and  we  have 
the  gentleman's  own  statement  in  evidence  that  even  the 
partial  application  of  that  system  upon  foreign  commerce 
had  contributed  to  the  general  prosperity  of  the  country. 
How  does  Mr.  Blaine  reconcile  that  proposition  with 
the  other,  viz.:  that  the  diametrically  opposite  system, 
that  of  protection  or  restriction,  has  also  had  the  effect 
of  contributing  to  the  general  prosperity  of  the  country  ? 

In  support  of  his  claims  Mr.  Blaine  produces  figures 
frcm  the  last  United  States  census  report  and  other 
official  statistics.  His  principal  boast  is  that  under  the 
system  of  protection  the  aggregate  wealth  of  the  United 
States  had  reached  in  1880  the  enormous  figure  of  $43,- 
600,000,000. 

In  parading  this  array  of  figures  he  seems  to  place 
more  confidence  than  we  do  in  their  reliability.  But  since 
he  produces  them  in  support  of  his  claims,  it  is  but  just  and 
proper  in  scrutinizing  his  statement  that  we  use  the  same 
official  authority. 

From  the  figures  of  the  same  report  it  appears  that  in 
1850  the  total  estimated  wealth  of  the  country  aggre- 
gated $7,000,000,000  in  round  numbers.  During  the 
following  low  tariff  decade  from  1850  to  I860  our 
wealth  increased  to  $16,000,000,000  or  126  per  cent ; 
from  1860  to  1870,  under  the  high  protective  tariff  sys- 
tem, this  aggregate  wealth  increased  to  $30,000,000,000  or 
eighty-seven  per  cent,  and  during  the  next  high  protective 
decade  to  $13,600,000,000  or  forty-six  per  cent. 


GENERAL    EFFECT   OF    PROTECTIVE    SYSTEM.  51 

The  census  also  shows,  that  the  capital  invested  in 
manufactories  increased  during  the  low  tariff  decade  ninety 
per  cent,  and  only  thirty-two  per  cent  during  the  high  pro- 
tective system,  from  1S70  to  1880. 

"Wages,  upon  which  so  much  stress  is  laid  by  protec- 
tionists, increased  sixty  per  cent  during  the  low  tariff  de- 
cade and  only  thirty-two  per  cent  under  the  high  tariff  de- 
cade. 

The  raw  material  used  in  manufactories  from  1850  to 
1800  increased  eighty-six  per  cent,  and  only  thirty-six  per 
cent  from  1870  to  1880. 

The  value  of  manufactured  products  increased  under  the 
low  tariff  decade  to  eighty-live  per  cent,  and  only  twenty- 
seven  per  cent  under  the  high  tariff  system. 

During  the  years  of  the  low  Walker  tariff,  from  1850 
to  1860,  the  exports  of  manufactured  articles  increased  in 
the  ratio  of  171  per  cent,  but  during  the  next  twenty 
years  of  high  protective  tariff  the  corresponding  increase 
of  manufactured  exports  was  only  eighty  per  cent. 

Our  cod  fisheries  had  steadily  increased  under  the  low 
Walker  tariff  until  they  had  reached  93,000  tons  in  1850, 
and  in  1860  had  increased  to  137,000  tons,  when,  under  the 
protective  system,  the  fisheries  steadily  decreased  until 
both  cod  and  mackeral  fishing,  which  heretofore  had  not 
been  figured  together,  had  dwindled  to  77,000  tons  in 
1882. 

According  to  Mr.  Blaine's  statistics,  the  capacity  of 
the  American  ships  engaged  in  the  ocean  trade  in  1850 
was  1,440,000  tons  in  round  numbers.  This  capacity 
increased  during  the  low  tariff  decade  to  2,380,000  tons, 
but  just  as  soon  as  the  effect  of  the  exorbitant  tariff  of 
1862-3  was  felt,  that  tonnage  decreased  until  it  fell  to 
1,200,000  tons. 


52  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

Prof.  Perry,  in  his  "  Political  Economy,"  amplifies  Mr. 
Blaine's  statistics  as  follows:  "The  number  of  vessels 
plying  between  the  United  States  and  Europe  in  1881  was 
5,210,  of  which  555  were  steamships.  Of  the  sailing-vsc- 
sels,  the  United  States  had  nineteen  per  cent  of  the  ton- 
nage. Of  the  steamships,  eighty  per  cent  were  British,  and 
the  United  States  had  four  and  no  more.  Four  steamships 
out  of  555,  where  we  once  had  three-fourths  of  the  busi- 
ness." 

From  the  official  reports  on  "  Commerce  and  Naviga- 
tion of  the  United  States,"  it  appears  that  in  1821,  of 
the  $128,000,000  worth  of  exports  and  imports,  over 
$113,000,000  was  carried  in  United  States  vessels.  This 
proportion  was  kept  up  until  1860,  when  of  $760,000,000 
worth  of  imports  and  exports,  $507,000,000  was  carried 
in  American  vessels,  or  nearly  seventy  per  cent  of  the 
whole.  "With  the  adoption  of  the  high  protective  system, 
our  carrying  trade  steadily  decreased,  until  in  1883,  when 
;:  fi  er  twenty-three  years  of  high  protection,  of  the  $1,300,- 
000,000  worth  of  imports  and  exports,  only  $263,000,000, 
or  sixteen  per  cent,  was  carried  in  American  vessels. 

Navigation  is  the  connecting  link  of  international 
intercourse,  and  the  interests  of  our  merchant  marine 
should  have  been  watched  by  our  law-makers  with  the 
most  intense  solicitude.  But  instead,  this  great  interest 
of  the  country,  the  same  as  that  of  the  farmers,  has  been 
sacrificed  to  the  protection  molochs  of  Pennsylvania  and 
the  New  England  States. 

It  is  true  there  were  other  causes  beside  the  tariff 
which  contributed  to  the  decline  of  our  ocean  marine,  the 
principal  one  being,  the  change  of  wooden  to  iron  ships 
and  the  displacement  of  sailing  vessels  by  steamships.  In 
both  of  these  items  England   had  distanced  the  United 


GENERAL    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTIVE    SYSTEM.  53 

3S  five  years  before  the  war.  But  there  is  not  the 
]  ast  doubt  that  if  the  government  had  kept  its  hand  off 
private  concerns,  the  well-known  American  enterprise  and 
push  would,  in  a  comparatively  short  time,  have  regained 
the  lost  ground.  As  it  is,  the  tonnage  of  free  trade  Eng- 
land's merchant  marine,  which  was  but  935,000  tons  in 
1856,  or  considerably  less  than  ours,  has  to-day  nearly 
reached  8,000,000  tons,  or  more  than  four  times  as  much 
as  ours. 

Again,  we  are  told  by  Mr.  Blaine  that  England  "has 
stimulated  the  growth  of  her  ocean  marine  by  the  most 
enormous  bounties  ever  paid  by  any  nation  to  any  enter- 
prise." 

Admitting  that  a  few  of  the  most  important  steam- 
ship lines  were  subsidized  by  the  English  government, 
that  fact  cuts  only  a  small  figure  in  the  marvelous  rapid- 
ity with  which  Great  Britain  has  monopolized  the  ocean- 
carrying  trade  of  the  world.  Ocean  shipping  follows 
trade  with  as  much  mathematical  certainty  as  the  estab- 
lishment of  postal  routes  or  of  express  lines  follow  the 
development  of  a  country.  It  is  to  the  enormous  growth 
of  her  miscellaneous  trade,  established  in  all  parts  of  the 
world  under  the  beneficial  influence  of  her  free  fissal 
system,  that  the  unparalleled  development  of  her  shipping 
interest  is  due. 

To  England  every  market  of  the  world  is  open  to 
receive  every  conceivable  article  of  manufactured  product 
because  she  is  the  cheapest  and  most  unhampered  producer 
in  the  world. 

The  vessel  sailing  from  London  to  the  Sandwich 
Islands  with  a  miscellaneous  cargo  may  not  find  a  cargo 
to  return  with,  but  may  find  one  for  Sidney,  Australia ; 
there  it  may  obtain  a  cargo  to  Singapore,  where,  again,  it 


54  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

may  reload  for  New  York,  when,  at  last,  it  can  be  loaded 
with  American  produce  for  the  home  port. 

This  is  what  freedom  of  commerce  is  doing  for  the 
British  merchant  marine  but  which  our  protective  sys- 
tem has  entirely  prevented  the  merchant  marine  of  the 
United  States  from  doing. 

Again  :  "  The  extension  of  postal  facilities,"  says  Mr. 
Blaine,  on  page  673,  vol.  II,  of  his  work,  "  is  perhaps  the 
most  significant  measure  of  the  intellectual  activity  of  a 
people." 

In  appendix  I,  vol.  I,  of  the  same  work,  we  find  that 
in  1845,  the  year  previous  to  the  enactment  of  Mr. 
"Walker's  tariff  for  revenue,  the  postal  facilities  of  the 
United  States  and  Territories  consisted  of  143,940  miles 
of  postal  routes. 

During  the  low  tariff  period  the  extent  of  the  post- 
routes  had  increased  to  200,052  miles  in  1859,  or  a  clear 
increase  in  fourteen  years  of  116,112  miles. 

In  1879,  after  almost  twenty  years  of  high  protection, 
and  with  nearly  twice  the  population,  these  postal  facili- 
ties, which  Mr.  Blaine  contends,  "  are  the  most  significant 
measure  of  the  intellectual  activity  of  a  people,"  had 
increased  to  but  316,711,  or  a  net  increase  of  only  56,098 
miles;  about  half  as  many  during  twenty  years  under 
protection  as  during  the  fourteen  years  under  a  tariff  for 
revenue.  From  this  it  would  appear  that  the  intellectual 
activity  of  the  American  people,  as  measured  b}^  Mr. 
Blaine's  own  standard,  has  experienced  a  remarkable  de- 
cline under  the  influence  of  the  protective  system. 

Again;  on  page  674,  vol.  II,  he  says :  "  The  increase 
ratio  in  the  construction  of  railroads  gives  some  concep- 
tion of  the  progress  of  wealth." 

The  following  figures  are  those  of  appendix  1,  vol.  II 


GENERAL    EFFECT   OF   PROTECTIVE    SYSTEM.  55 

of  liis  work.  It  appears  therefrom  that  at  the  close  of 
1849,  when  Mr.  Walker's  revenue  tariff  began  to  fairly 
show  its  effect  upon  the  prosperity  of  the  country,  there 
were  7,365  miles  of  railroads  in  operation  in  the  United 
States. 

The  annual  construction  of  railroads  during  the  eleven 
years  from  1850  to  I860,  inclusive,  was  as  follows : 

In  1850 1,369  miles.     In  1856 3,642  miles. 

"1851 1,961     "  "1857 2,487  " 

"  1852' 1,926     "  "  1858 2,465  " 

"1853 2,452     "  "1859 1.821  " 

"1854 1.360     "  "1860 1,846  " 

"  1855 1,654     "  

22,983  " 

A  ratio  of  increase  of  240  per  cent,  or  three  times  as 
many  miles  as  had  ever  been  built  before  in  this  coun- 
try. 

The  annual  construction  of  railroads  from  18G0  to  1879, 
the  high  protection  period,  was  as  follows  : 

In  1861 651  miles.  In  1867 2,449  miles. 

"1862 834     "  "1868 2,979     " 

"1863 1,050     "  "  1S69 4,615     " 

"1864 738     "  "1870 6,070     " 

"  1865 1,177     "  

"  1866 1,716     "  22,279     " 

In  1871 7,379  miles.     In  1876 2,712  miles. 

"1872 5,878     "  "1877 2,281     " 

"1873 4,107     "  "1878 2,687     " 

"1874 2,105     "  "1879 4,721     " 

"  1875 1,713     "  

33,583     " 

Or,  an  increase,  since  1870,  of  only  about  fifty  per 
cent. 

Thus  it  appears  that  there  were  actually  more  miles 
of  railroad  constructed  from  1850  to  1860  than  from  1860 
to  1870,  and  the  fact,  notwithstanding  that  "  the  Pacific 
railroad  was  constructed  in  the  midst  of  the  gigantic  out- 


56  THE   PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

lays  of  the  war,"  and  that  from.  1870  to  1880,  after  the 
population  had  nearly  doubled,  the  increase  of  miles  was 
only  one-half  as  many  more  as  were  constructed  during 
the  low  tariff  period,  with  the  Mexican  War  on  our  hands. 

In  another  part  of  his  work,  Mr.  Blaine  says  that  the 
protectionists  attribute  the  state  of  extraordinary  pros- 
perity during  the  free  trade  period  from  1850  to  1860,  to 
other  causes  than  the  low  tariff  system,  to-wit :  "to  the 
Irish  famine,  to  war,  short  crops  and  the  unsettled  con- 
dition of  Europe,  and,  lastly,  to  the  discovery  of  gold  in 
California." 

The  startling  proposition  that  a  destitute  and  famish- 
ing people  increase  the  prosperity  of  another  people  will 
have  to  be  dismissed  as  too  frivolous  to  be  seriously  dis- 
cussed. The  next  argument,  that  the  unsettled  condition, 
the  short  crop  and  war  in  Europe,  gave  our  farmers 
unprecedented  opportunities  for  the  sale  of  their  products, 
may  be  answered  with  the  statement,  that  during  the  last 
period  of  protection  similar  conditions  prevailed  in  Europe, 
and  that  the  wars  which  Avere  waged  there  during  this 
time  greatly  exceeded  in  magnitude  those  of  the  pre- 
ceding decade. 

As  to  the  acquisition  of  Mexican  territory  and  the 
gold  plethora  of  1848-9,  Mr.  Blaine  says:  "Moreover, 
an  exceptional  condition  of  affairs  existed  in  the  United 
States  in  consequence  of  our  large  acquisition  of  territory 
from  Mexico  at  the  close  of  the  war,  and  the  subsequent 
and  almost  immediate  discovery  of  gold  in  California. 
A  new  and  extended  field  of  trade  Avas  thus  opened  up, 
in  Avhich  we  had  a  monopoly,  and  an  enormous  surplus  of 
money  was  speedily  created  from  the  products  of  the  rich 
mines  on  the  Pacific  coast." 

Now,  will  Mr.  Blaine  contend  that  this  large  acquisi- 


GENERAL    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTIVE    SYSTEM.  0  4 

tion  of  Mexican  territory,  peopled  as  it  was  by  a  few 
destitute  greasers,  half-breeds  and  naked  savages  in  1849, 
bears  any  comparison  to  the  opening  up  of  our  immense 
trans-Mississippi  territory  through  the  building  of  the 
Pacific  railroads  and  their  branches,  during  the  protection 
period  from  1860  to  1872? 

Did  the  opening  of  the  fields  of  trade  in  the  territory 
acquired  from  Mexico  bear  the  remotest  semblance  to  the 
enormous  traffic  that  has  since  sprung  up  in  the  western 
and  northwestern  territories? 

As  to  his  statement  that  the  rich  mines  of  the  Pacific 
coast  created  an  immense  amount  of  surplus  money,  let 
us  examine  the  figures  of  the  tables  in  appendix  D  of  his 
work.  These  show  the  total  amount  of  gold  and  silver 
coins  issued  from  the  mints  of  the  United  States  in  each 
decimal  period  since  1790.  There  we  find  that  between 
1811  and  1850 

$  89,239,817  in  gold  coin  and 
22,308,130  in  siver  coin  were  issued; 

total,  $111,607,947. 
Between  1850  and  1860 

$330,237,085,  gold; 
46,582,183,  silver; 


total,  $376,819,268. 

Between  1861  and  1870 

$292,409,545,  gold; 
13,188,601,  silver; 


total,  $305,598,146. 

Between  1870  and  1880, 

$392,125,751,  gold; 
155,123,087,  silver; 


total,  $547,248,838. 


58  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

And  during  the  two  years  from  1S81  to  18S3 
$208,076,239  gold  coin, 

84,268,825  silver  coin  were  issued; 

total,  $292,345,064. 

Thus  we  see  that  in  the  space  of  thirteen  years,  under 
protection,  the  grand  total  in  coin  issued  was  $839,593,902. 

Think  of  it !  in  the  short  space  of  thirteen  years  of 
protection,  over  eight  hundred  and  thirty-six  million  of 
dollars  in  gold  and  silver  coin  against  three  hundred  and 
seventy-six  millions  during  the  low  tariff  decade,  from 
1850  to  18G0,  and  then  consider  Mr.  Blaine's  assertion 
that  the  product  of  the  rich  mines  of  the  Pacific  coast 
was  one  of  the  main  causes  of  the  general  prosperity 
which  prevailed  in  this  country  during  the  low  tariff 
decade !  Three  hundred  and  seventy  million  dollars  is,  in 
Mr.  Blaine's  estimation,  a  plethora  of  surplus  money,  if 
expended  under  the  low  tariff  system,  but  the  snug  little 
sum  of  eight  hundred  and  thirty  millions,  if  expended 
under  the  protective  system,  is  hardly  worth  mentioning. 

The  prosperity  of  the  country,  to  a  large  extent,  de- 
pends on  the  amount  and  value  of  products  exported. 
But,  for  the  exports  of  our  agricultural  products,  the 
value  of  which  averaged  during  the  last  ten  years  from 
$500,000,000  to  $600,000,000  annually,  the  people  of  this 
country  would  be  in  a  sorry  plight,  indeed.  But  while 
there  has  been  a  steady  outward  stream  of  these  unpro- 
tected products,  what  has  become  of  the  exj^orfr  trade  in 
protected  products?     Let  us  see. 

In  1860,  under  the  tariff  for  revenue,  we  exported 
manufactured  cotton  goods  to  the  value  of  $10,934,796. 
In  1870,  after  ten  years  of  protection,  these  exports  had 
dwindled  to  the  Insignificant  value  of  $3,787,282.  and 
only    amounted  to  $9,9S1,418  in    1880,  or   a  falling  o\ 


GENERAL    EFFECT   OF   PROTECTIVE    SYSTEM. 


59 


$1,000,000  in  the  value  of  our  foreign  sales  of  cotton 
goods,  after  twenty  years  of  protection. 

Tobacco  figures  on  the  list  of  exports  in  1860  with 
$19,285,957;  and  in  1880,  after  twenty  years  of  protec- 
tion, we  exported  $18,442,273,  or  nearly  $1,000,000  in 
value  less  than  in  1860. 

In  1860  the  value  of  exports  of  furniture  and  other 
manufactures  of  wood  was  $10,047,956. 

In  1880,  after  twenty  years  of  protection,  while  the 
total  home  product  of  that  industry  had  reached  the  value 
of  $83,000,000,  the  value  of  our  exports  in  those  articles 
amounted  to  $16,237,376. 

In  1860  we  sold  to  foreign  nations  naval  stores  to  the 
value  of  $1,969,642,  and  only  $2,452,908  worth  in  1880. 

In  1860  the  value  of  exports  of  metals  and  their  manu- 
facture, exclusive  of  iron  and  steel,  amounted  to  $2,121,- 
683,  and  only  $1,928,030  in  1880,  an  actual  decrease  of 
$200,000,  under  the  blighting  effect  of  twenty  years' 
protection. 

England  is  selling  large  quantities  of  these  goods  at 
our  very  doors,  to  the  nearest  neighbors  south  of  us, 
where  we  would,  but  for  the  stupidity  of  our  law-makers, 
have  a  monopoly  of  the  market.* 


♦Export  in  18S0. 

English 
Goods. 

American 
Goods. 

$2,106,000 
2,101,000 

200,000 
3,400,00(1 
6,100,000 
3,163,000 
1,440,000 

670,000 
17,180,000 
3,081,000 
4,816,000 
5,162,000 
1,020,000 

418,000 

$832,200 

77,700 

66,800 

131,000 

825,000 
586,000 

149,000 

Brazil 

12,800 
087,000 

Argentine  Republic 

Chili 

52,500 
133,600 

217,800 

104,000 

24,000 

$51,235,000 

$3,899,400 

R.  K.  Bowker's  Economic  Facts, 


60 


THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 


In  1880  the  value  of  I3ritisli  exports  in  cotton  goods  to 
Mexico  and  the  South  American  States  was  $51,235,000, 
while  ours  amounted  to  the  insignificant  figure  of  $3,- 
899,400.  But  this  discrepancy  of  manufactured  exports 
between  free-trade  England  and  protectionist  America  is 
simply  astounding,  when  the  facts  are  considered  that  in 
1880  the  total  British  exports  in  metals  and  textiles 
amounted  to  the  enormous  sum  of  $772,000,000,  while  the 
exports  of  similar  articles  by  the  great  American  Republic, 
with  double  the  population,  with  twice  the  ingenuity  and 
spirit  of  enterprise,  and  with  fifty  times  the  natural  re- 
sources, amounted  to  the  beggarly  sum  of  $24,322,576.* 

In  1855  the  total  value  of  British  export  was  $466,- 
764,200,  while  in  1880  the  export  value  of  her  woolen  and 
cotton  fabrics  alone  amounted  to  $534,500,000.  This  is 
what  unrestricted  commerce  is  doing  for  those  little 
islands  on  the  European  coast. 

Let  the  humblest  American  workman  reflect,  for  an 
instant,  what  the  condition  of  his  class  would  be,  if  the 


♦Articles. 


METALS. 

Brass,  copper,  and  manufactured 
industries,  telegraph  wires  — 

Cutlery  and  hardware  

Firearms  

Foundry  products  and  ma- 
chinery   

Iron  and  steel,  tin,  etc 

TEXTILES. 

Cotton  goods 

Jute  goods 

Linen  goods" 

Silk  goods 

Woolens,  worsteds  and  mixed 
textiles 


American 
Product'n, 

1880. 

English 

Exports  in 

1880. 

American 
Exports  in 

1880. 

$672,078,000 

30,000,000 

38,000.000 

5,700,000 

214,378,000 

384,000,000 

$237,500,000 

27,000,000 

19,000,000 

6,500,000 

50,000,000 

135,000,000 

$14,116,000 
180,000 

1,100.1  HK) 

2,286,000 

5,700,000 
4,850,000 

5521,300,000 

211,000,000 

697,000 

602,000 

41,000,000 

268,000,000 

$534,500,000 

375,000,000 

12,500,000 

30,000,000 

17,000,000 

100,000,000 

$10,216,576 
10,000,000 

210,576 

Foreign 

1  in  ports, 
1880. 


$72,744,000 

1,787,000 
1,900,000 

830,000 

1,227,000 
67,000,000 


122,a50,000 
30,000,000 
2,850,000 
22,500,000 

32,000,000 

35,000,000 


K.  Bowker's  Economic  Pacts. 


GENERAL    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTIVE    SYSTEM.  01 

above  figures  of  the  relative  value  of  English  and  Amer- 
ican exports  were  reversed.  Suppose  we  were  given  as 
free  a  scope  to  all  our  individual  and  national  faculties 
and  energies  as  the  Britisher  has  ?  Suppose  the  restrict- 
ive bars  across  the  boundary  lines  were  removed  and  free 
elbow  room  given  to  our  enterprising  merchants.  Sup- 
pose our  American  "drummer,"  with  his  characteristic 
geniality,  dash  and  persistency,  be  given  the  whole  world 
as  a  field  of  operation.  How  long  would  it  be  before  we 
would  be  selling  $800,000,000  worth  of  manufactured 
goods  to  the  foreigner  instead  of  $24,000,000 ;  and  having 
thus  obtained  a  foothold  in  the  markets  of  the  world,  is  it 
not  plain  that  our  manufacturing  plants  would  be  insuffi- 
cient to  produce  the  increased  foreign  demand,  and  would 
have  to  be  multiplied  ?  Would  not  in  that  case  the  de- 
mand for  labor  be  also  greatly  increased  ?  And  would 
not  such  a  demand  have  the  effect  of  insuring  more  per- 
manent work  and  a  higher  rate  of  wages  ? 

Is  it  not  plainly  apparent  from  the  foregoing  exhibits 
that,  while  we  have  been  using  our  renowned  ingenuity 
in  efforts  at  getting  the  best  bargains  from  each  other, 
and  in  trying  to  get  rich  at  the  expense  of  each  other,  we 
have  been  losing  an  incalculable  amount  of  money,  and 
golden  opportunities  also,  to  increase  our  common  stock 
of  wealth  through  profitable  trades  with  foreign  nations? 
And  do  the  above  figures  not  also  plainly  show  that  if 
the  American  people  are  still  more  prosperous  than  the 
people  of  any  other  country,  it  is  not  from  the  effect  of 
protection,  but  in  spite  of  it?  If  in  addition  to  building 
up  fabulous  private  fortunes,  in  defraying  the  enormous 
expenses  of  a  great  war,  and  bearing  the  colossal  burdens 
of  local  taxation,  we  have  been  able  to  apparently  hold 
our  own,  it  is  due  to  our  incomparable  powers  of  recu- 


62  T&E   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

peration,  to  the  steady  flood  of  a  valuable  immigration, 
and  to  the  almost  inexhaustible  resources  of  our  fields, 
our  forests  and  our  mines. 

If  the  government  of  the  United  States  were  managed 
upon  sound  business  principles  its  methods  would  be  busi- 
ness-like, and  it  would  no  more  exchange  a  good  business 
method  for  an  injurious  one  than  would  the  private  citi- 
zen in  the  management  of  his  business. 

Let  us  illustrate  for  instance  : 

A  few  years  ago  John  Jones  was  the  successful  man- 
ager of  a  Western  Manufacturing  Company.  The  con- 
cern had  been  early  established  and  was  in  a  flourshing  con- 
condition.  Under  the  careful  and  economical  manage- 
ment of  Mr.  Jones,  the  company  was  doing  such  a  thriv- 
ing business  that  a  yearly  dividend  of  125  per  cent  was 
divided  among  the  overjoyed  shareholders.  But,  as  in 
every  corporation  where  there  are  factions,  jealousies 
arose  among  them  as  to  who  should  be  in  the  board  of 
directors.  The  "  outs  "  circulated  a  thousand  lies  about 
the  "ins,"  and  when  the  election  came  around  the  old 
board  was  thrown  out  and  a  new  one  stepped  in.  The 
old  manager,  who  had  been  so  successful  in  making  the 
establishment  prosperous,  had  also  to  go,  and  Mr.  Joe 
Smith,  a  man  who  had  the  reputation  of  meddling  with 
everybody's  business  except  his  own,  was  put  in  his  place. 
No  sooner  had  the  latter  assumed  his  duties  than  he  went 
about  upsetting  all  the  rules  and  methods  under  which  the 
corporation  had  grown  prosperous  and  wealthy,  substi- 
tuting, instead,  his  own  system  of  running  the  factory. 
The  effect  was  that  the  next  year  the  dividends  to  be 
declared  amounted  to  only  eighty-seven  per  cent.  Being 
permitted  to  remain  in  charge  another  year,  the  dividends 
fell  to  forty-six  per  cent,  and,  instead  of  apologizing  for 


GENERAL    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTIVE    SYSTEM.  63 

his  shortcomings  and  resigning  his  trust,  he  set  up  the 
impudent  claim  that  the  prosperity  of  the  concern  was 
due  to  him  and  his  new  system.  What  would  sensible 
stockholders  have  done  in  that  case  ?  Why,  they  would 
have  insisted  upon  returning  to  the  old  system  ;  but  the 
majority  were  not  sensible,  and  therefore  insisted  upou 
retaining  the  presumptuous  manager. 

To  let  well  enough  alone  was  not  on  their  programme. 
Mr.  Blaine's  party  of  generous  income  and  liberal  ex- 
penditures pleased  them  better.  The  fiscal  system  which 
had  been  yielding  abundant  public  revenue,  and  had  placed 
the  business  of  the  country  in  a  flourishing  condition,  did 
not  answer  their  purpose.  It  was  replaced  by  a  system 
which  would  yield  abundant  private  revenue,  and  which 
would  place  the  business  of  a  limited  number  of  individu- 
als in  a  flourishing  condition.  The  national  systemTwhichj 
as  admitted  by  Mr.  Blaine,  "  had  encouraged  the  undertak- 
ing of  large  enterprises,  and  had  secured  the  general  pros- 
perity of  the  country  for  a  considerable  period,"  was 
supplanted  by  the  sectional  one,  which,  during  former 
periods  of  protection,  had  become  notorious  as  the  Penn- 
sylvania system.  If  that  system  ever  had  any  ground  of 
justification  it  was  in  the  early  stages  of  our  national  ex- 
istence, which,  however,  I  do  not  admit.  War  necessities 
and  a  depleted  treasury  gave  it  a  colorable  excuse,  and  it 
was  acquiesced  in  by  the  people  as  a  temporary  measure 
of  exigency.  No  such  excuses  are  admissible  to-day.  Nor 
do  the  protectionists  claim  its  continuance  upon  that 
ground.  Protective  legislation  to-day  is  special  legisla- 
tion, without  even  the  color  of  commonality,  and  an  act 
for  the  protection  of  this  or  that  industry  is  not  a  public 
but  a  private  measure,  and  it  would  be  difficult  for  Mr. 
Blaine,  even,  to  exactly  point  out  the  way  in  which  this 
law-making  for  the  benefit  of  private  concerns  can  con- 
tribute to  the  marvelous  prosperity  of  the  United'  States. 


THE  EFFECT  OF  PROTECTION  ON 
FARMERS. 


"IVTOW  f°r  the  c^m  °f  the  protectionists  that  the 
1  \|  process  of  taking  from  John,  Dick  and  Harry,  and 
giving  it  to  Peter,  will  enhance  the  prosperity  of  all 
four.  Let  us  begin  with  the  larger  half  of  our  popula- 
tion, the  American  agriculturists,  and  see  how  their 
interests  have  been  affected  by  the  tariff.  There  can  be 
no  controversy  upon  the  statement  that  of  all  the  great 
interests  of  the  country,  agriculture  is  preeminently  the 
most  important.  The  condition  of  its  prosperity  consti- 
tutes, as  it  were,  the  barometer  of  the  high  and  low  state 
of  prosperity  of  the  whole  country.  If  crops  are  plenti- 
ful and  the  prices  of  products  are  good,  the  condition  of 
all  other  interests  of  the  country  is  at  once  favorably 
affected.  The  prompt  and  effectual  relief  afforded  by 
the  agriculturists  of  the  country  to  the  prostrated  man- 
ufacturers, merchants  and  tradesmen  in  1880  and  1881, 
furnishes  the  most  recent  case  in  proof.  It  was  not  pro- 
tection, but  the  farmers,  that  set  the  idle  furnaces,  the 
hammers  and  the  spindles  of  the  protective  industries 
again  in  motion,  and  relieved  the  misery  of  more  than  a 
million  tramping  laborers  and  mechanics.  It  was  the  un- 
protected half  of  our  population  that  infused  new  life 
into  and  rekindled  the  courage  of  the  other  half. 

If  the  agriculturists  of  the  country  are  suffering,  either 
from  natural  causes  or  from  the  effect  of  unwise  legisla- 
tion, all  other  great  interests  of  the  country  suffer  in  con- 
sequence. History  is  full  of  examples  substantiating  this 
fact. 

As  long  as  Home  was  in  her  ascendancy  she  retained 

respect  for  the  arts  of  agriculture.      The  plains  of  Italy 

64 


THE    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS.  65 

were  abundant  in  crops  of  various  kinds  and  rich  in  past- 
ures and  flocks.  "  The  main  source  of  wealth  among  the 
Romans,  and  their  most  honorable  occupation,"  says  the 
historian  Schmitz,  "  was  agriculture." 

The  greatest  generals  and  statesmen,  after  holding  for 
a  time  the  helm  of  the  republic  and  gaining  victories  and 
triumphs,  did  not  hesitate  to  return  to  the  plough  and  live 
in  rural  retirement.  The  decadence  of  agriculture  marks 
the  decadence  of  Rome ;  it  was  the  beginning  of  her  end. 
Should  we  forget  the  great  lessons  of  history  ? 

Now  let  us  look  into  the  share  the  farmer  has  had  in 
the  "  unexampled  prosperity  of  the  country  "  on  account 
of  our  tariff  system.  This  can  best  be  done  by  comparing 
its  relative  effect  upon  one  of  the  agricultural  and  one  of  the 
manufacturing  States,  respectively;  say  Illinois  and  Penn- 
sylvania. Of  course,  there  has  always  been  absolute  free 
trade  between  these  two  States,  and  if  not  interfered  with 
by  governmental  restriction,  there  is  no  reason  why  both 
should  not  equally  prosper.  Its  citizens  are  all  citizens  of 
a  common  country,  bound  by  every  dictate  of  patriotism 
to  practice  good  fellowship  and  harmony  between  each 
other.  But  beyond  such  mutual  good-will  we  know  of  no 
law,  human  or  divine,  which  places  the  citizens  of  one  of 
these  States  under  obligations  to  furnish  material  aid  to 
any  of  the  citizens  of  the  other  State,  in  order  to  build  up 
and  carry  on  some  private  enterprise,  and  it  would  be  just 
as  absurd,  for  the  Illinois  farmer  to  ask  the  Pennsylvania 
mine  owner  to  assist  him  to  lift  a  mortgage  from  his  farm, 
as  it  is  for  the  Pennsylvania  man  to  ask  the  Illinois 
farmer  to  assist  him  in  paying  off  his  hands.  In  theory, 
this  proposition  would  seem  to  be  unassailable.  But  let 
us  see  whether  in  practice  it  is  so. 

Iron,  the  principal  product  of  Pennsylvania,  is  "pro- 


66  THE   PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

tected"  against  foreign  competition  by  the  government, 
say  fifty  per  cent  in  the  average ;  this,  of  course,  furnishes 
the  iron  master  of  that  State  with  the  advantage  of  charg- 
ing, if  he  chooses  to  do  so,  or,  if  agreed  upon  by  the 
"  iron  pool,"  fifty  per  cent  more  for  his  product  than  he 
could  charge  without  such  "  protection." 

Breadstuffs  and  provisions,  the  principal  products  of  the 
State  of  Illinois,  cannot  be  "  protected  " ;  that  is  to  say,  the 
farmers  and  stock-raisers  of  that  State  cannot,  so  long  as  the 
United  States  has  a  surplus  of  those  agricultural  products 
to  sell,  charge  one  cent  more  for  their  product  than  what 
their  competitors  of  the  rest  of  the  world  get  for  theirs  in 
the  London  market ;  consequently,  the  exchangeable  value 
of  the  Illinois  product  is. fifty  per  cent  less  than  that  of  the 
Pennsylvania  product.  Or,  to  be  more  explicit,  under  the 
protective  tariff  the  Illinois  farmer  has  to  give  about  the 
same  quantity  of  wheat  and  bacon  for  a  ton  of  Pennsyl- 
vania iron  that  he  would  for  a  ton  of  English  iron,  with 
this  difference,  that  in  the  latter  case,  the  fifty  per  cent 
tax  would  go  into  the  United  States  Treasury,  while  in 
the  former,  the  fifty  per  cent  protection  goes  into  the 
pocket  of  the  Pennsylvania  iron-master;  and  that  it  is, 
therefore,  all  the  same  to  Illinois  whether  the  Federal 
custom  house  is  located  in  New  York  or  upon  her  own 
borders ;  she  pays  fifty  per  cent  more  for  the  iron  she 
needs  than  she  would  if  permitted  to  exchange. the  wheat 
and  provisions,  not  needed  at  home,  with  the  people  who 
do  need  them  but  have  a  surplus  of  iron  to  sell. 

To  make  this  matter  still  clearer,  let  us  suppose  a 
Chicago  packer,  who  is  also  interested  in  railroad  building, 
takes  fifteen  hundred  barrels  of  pork  to  Philadelphia  with 
the  intention  of  turning  the  proceeds  into  steel  rails.  The 
market  price  of  pork  is  supposed  to  be  $13.34  per  barrel, 


THE    EFFECT   OF    PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS.  67 

and  Pennsylvania  steel  rails  cannot  be  had  for  less  than 
$28  per  ton,  so  that  for  his  fifteen  hundred  barrels  of  pork 
he  would  get  about  714  tons  of  Pennsylvania  rails.  While 
there,  he  learns  that  an  English  vessel  with  one  thousand 
tons  of  steel  rails  on  board  is  lying  in  port.  The  captain 
offers  to  sell  the  rails  at  $20,  cash,  per  ton,  or  to  take  the 
American  pork  at  the  market  price  in  exchange.  But, 
while  closing  the  bargain  a  United  States  custom  officer 
steps  up  with  the  information  that,  upon  landing,  a  duty 
of  fifty  per  cent  would  have  to  be  paid  on  the  rails.  As 
this  would  raise  the  price  of  the  rails  to  $30  per  ton,  the 
Illinois  man  concludes  to  buy  the  Pennsylvania  rails. 
However,  instead  of  a  thousand  tons  which,  but  for  the 
interference  of  the  government,  he  might  have  had  for 
his  fifteen  hundred  barrels  of  pork,  he  only  receives  714 
tons,  or  a  clear  loss  for  our  Illinois  man  of  $5,720.  Had 
this  amount  gone  into  the  United  States  Treasury,  our 
Prairie  State  friend  might  have  consoled  himself  with 
the  thought  that  this  sum  would  be  expended  for  the 
public  benefit,  and  that  he  accordingly  had  performed  a 
patriotic  act. 

Is  not  that  the  old  story  of  the  Indian  and  the  white 
hunter  over  again?  Is  it  not  clear  that  "free  trade  and 
protection  at  the  same  time"  means  turkey  for  Pennsyl- 
vania and  buzzard  for  Illinois,  and  buzzard  for  Illinois  and 
turkey  for  Pennsylvania;  and  that  the  turkey,  that  is,  the 
marvelous  prosperity  to  which  the  double  s}Tstem  is  said 
to  have  contributed,  has  all  gone  to  Pennsylvania  ? 

But  in  order  to  remove  even  the  shadow  of  a  doubt 
from  the  mind  of  the  reader,  that  such  is  the  actual  out- 
come of  this  double-action  system,  we  will  now  produce 
in  evidence  the  official  figures  of  the  United  States  Census 
Report. 


68  THE    PROTCETTVE    TAKIFF. 

These  will  show  that  the  aggregate  wealth  of  the 
State  of  Pennsylvania  in  1850  was  $313  per  capita,  while 
that  of  Illinois  was  $183  per  capita.  During  the  low 
tariff  decade  from  1850  to  1860  the  State  of  Pennsylvania 
increased  her  aggregate  wealth  to  $487  per  capita,  while 
the  State  of  Illinois  increased  hers  to  $509  per  capita. 
From  1860  to  1870,  under  the  high  protective  tariff,  when, 
by  action  of  the  government,  the  exchangeable  values  of 
her  main  product  were  enhanced  from  forty  to  fifty  per 
cent,  the  State  of  Pennsjdvania  increased  her  wealth  to 
$1,081  per  capita,  while  the  State  of  Illinois,  whose 
exchangeable  value  of  products  was  regulated  in  foreign 
markets,  increased  hers  only  to  $835  per  capita,  and  dur- 
ing the  following  decade  of  high  protection  for  the  Penn- 
sylvania product,  that  State  increased  her  wealth  to 
$1,259  per  capita,  while  that  of  the  tributary  State  of  Illi- 
nois increased  hers  only  $1,005  per  capita.  But  to  make 
this  discrepancy  between  manufacturing  and  agricultural 
communities  still  more  glaringly  apparent,  we  will  now 
compare  the  relative  effect  of  this  system  upon  the  States 
of  Massachusetts  and  Illinois,  respectively. 

In  1850  the  aggregate  true  value  of  wealth  of  the 
manufacturing  State  of  Massachusetts,  as  given  in  the 
census  report,  was  $577  per  capita,  while  that  of  the  agri- 
cultural State  of  Illinois,  as  already  shown,  was  only  $183 
per  capita. 

During  the  following  decade  of  comparative  non-in- 
terference by  the  government,  from  1850  to  1860,  the 
estimated  aggregate  wealth  of  Massachusetts  increased  to 
$662  per  capita^  or  exactly  fifteen  per  cent,  while  that  of 
Illinois  increased  to  $509,  or  nearly  three  hundred  per  cent. 
In  1880,  after  twenty  years'  experience,  under  the  system 
of  free  trade  and  protection  at  the  same  time,  the  wealth 


THE    EFFECT   OF    PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS.  69 

of  Massachusetts  had  increased  to  the  enormous  figure  of 
$1,568  per  capita,  while  that  of  Illinois  had  only  increased 
to  $1,005. 

Thus,  it  appears  that  while  the  wealth  of  the  State  of 
Illinois  during  the  ten  years  under  the  low  revenue 
tariff  had  trebled,  its  wealth  had  only  doubled  during 
the  twenty  years  of  protection. 

Massachusetts,  on  the  other  hand,  had  increased  her 
wealth  at  the  rate  of  only  fifteen  per  cent  per  capita 
during  the  ten  years  of  low  tariff,  while  she  increased  her 
wealth  150  per  cent  during  the  twenty  years  of  protection. 

Again.  Here  are  the  people  of  the  great  State  of  Illi- 
nois, who  have  been  exporting  more  breadstuffs,  pro- 
visions and  high  wines  than  the  people  of  any  other  State 
in  the  Union,  and,  consequently,  have  obtained  more  for- 
eign capital  than  any  other  during  the  twenty  years  of 
protection,  have  accumulated  but  one-half  of  the  wealth 
which  has  been  accumulated  by  Massachusetts,  a  State 
which  exports  comparatively  nothing,  and,  consequently, 
has  no  other  resources  for  the  accumulation  of  her  wealth 
than  the  great  sucking-pump  placed  over  the  agricultural 
States  by  a  despotic  government,  falsely  styled  "the 
government  of  the  people." 

We  have  seen  that  in  1850  the  total  value  of  wealth  of 
the  country  Avas  $7,000,000,000  in  round  numbers.  Of 
that  great  wealth  the  farmers  owned  nearly  $4,000,000,000, 
or  more  than  one-half.  When,  as  we  have  seen,  after  ten 
years  of  low  revenue  tariff  the  total  wealth  of  the  coun- 
try had  increased  to  $16,000,000,000,  the  farmers'  share 
of  that  wealth  was  $8,000,000,000,  or  still  one-half.  But 
when,  in  1880,  after  twenty  years  of  protection,  the  na- 
tional wealth  had  reached  $43,600,000,000,  the  farmers' 
share  was  but  $12,000,000,000,  or  a  little  more  than  one- 


70  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

fourth.  Thus,  it  will  appear,  that  while  under  a  revenue 
tariff  the  aggregate  wealth  of  one-half  of  our  population, 
namely,  the  agricultural  half,  had  increased  at  an  even  rate 
with  the  other  half  during  twenty  years  of  protection, 
the  farmers'  wealth  increased  only  $4,000,000,000,  while 
the  wealth  of  the  other  half  increased  $23,000,000,000,  or 
nearly  six-fold. 

The  United  States  Census  Eeport  contains  the  further 
interesting  information  that  the  value  of  the  farms  of  the 
country  in  1850  was  $3,272,000,000  in  round  numbers. 
This  value  increased  during  the  low  tariff  decade  to  $6,600,- 
000,000,  or  over  one  hundred  per  cent.  During  the  high 
tariff  decade,  from  1860  to  1870,  that  value  had  increased 
to  $9,300,000,000,  or  about  forty-one  per  cent,  and  be- 
tween 1870  and  1880  it  increased  to  a  little  over  $10,000,- 
000,000,  or  only  nine  per  cent.  So  the  official  statistics 
show  that  while  the  value  of  the  farms  in  the  United 
States  had  doubled  under  ten  years  of  low  tariff,  it  had 
only  increased  about  seventy-five  per  cent  under  twenty 
years  of  high  tariff. 

The  gold  value  of  live  stock  in  the  United  States  in 
1850  was  $540,000,000.  During  the  ten  years  of  low  tariff, 
from  1850  to  1860,  that  value  increased  to  nearly  $11,- 
000,000,000,  or  one  hundred  per  cent.  From  1860  to  1870, 
this  value  had  increased  but  $217,000,000,  or  twelve  per 
cent,  and  in  1880  but  to  $1,500,000,000,  or  twenty-three 
per*  cent.  Thus  it  would  seem  that  under  ten  years  of 
low  tariff,  the  value  of  live  stock  increased  $545,000,- 
000,  while  under  twenty  years  of  high  tariff  it  only  in- 
creased $411,000,000. 

The  total  value  of  farm  machinery  in  1850  was  valued 
at  about  $152,000,000.  During  the  ten  years  of  low  tariff, 
from  1850  to  1860,  this  value  increased  to  $246,000,000, 


THE    EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS.  71 

or  over  sixty  per  cent.  During  the  twenty  years  of  high 
tariff,  from  1860  to  18S0,  tin's  value  increased  to  $106,- 
000,000,  or  but  little  over  fifty  per  cent. 

There  is  no  earthly  reason  to  suppose  that  this  steady 
increase  in  the  general  prosperity  of  the  farmer  would 
not  have  continued  had  the  low  tariff  policy  of  the  gov- 
ernment not  been  changed  to  one  of  protection.  That  is 
to  say,  if  the  rate  of  increase  in  the  aggregate  agri- 
cultural wealth  had  not  been  interfered  with  by 
special  legislation,  the  total  agricultural  wealth  of  the 
country  would  have  been  in  1880  over  $32,000,000,000, 
instead  of  only  $12,000,000,000,  or  nearly  three  times 
greater. 

But  this  uneven  rate  of  increase  of  wealth  in  the  man- 
ufacturing and  agricultural  States,  respectively,  which, 
with  the  certainty  of  the  law  of  gravitation,-  must  be  the 
ultimate  effect  of  this  protective  system,  becomes  still 
more  glaringly  apparent  when  the  per  capita  subdivision 
of  the  aggregate  wealth  of  these  respective  States  is  scru- 
tinized. 

It  will  hardly  be  questioned  that  the  wealth  in  the 
agricultural  States  is  more  evenly  divided  among  its 
inhabitants  than  in  the  manufacturing  States;  that  is, 
the  number  of  excessively  wealthy  individuals  is  less 
and  the  number  of  property  owners  greater.  The  mill- 
ionaire mill-owner,  who  employs  five  thousand  persons, 
generally  owns  all  the  wealth  himself ;  still,  for  the  con- 
venient use  of  the  statistician  this  wealth  is  divided  per 
capita  among  the  propert}dess  operatives,  upon  paper. 

The  only  wealth  generally  owned  by  the  manufactur- 
ing population  consists  in  its  labor,  and  hereafter  it  will 
be  demonstrated,  that  the  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
operatives  in  the  cotton  and  woolen  mills  of  New  England, 


72  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

in  the  mining  regions  of  Pennsylvania,  in  fact,  in  almost 
all  large  manufacturing  and  mining  centers,  live  to-day 
from  hand  to  mouth,  and  that  they  do  not  own  a  cent's 
worth  of  the  per  capita  wealth  with  which  the  popula- 
tion of  their  respective  States  is  credited. 

Let  us  illustrate :  Suppose  the  great  Pullman  manu- 
facturing establishment  near  South  Chicago,  with  all  its 
lands  and  appurtenances,  was  estimated  at  $10,000,000 ; 
how  much  per  capita  of  this  wealth  belongs  to  any 
one  of  the  thousands  of  workmen  there  employed  1  ISTot 
a  dollar.  And  still  each  one  of  these  operatives  is  figur- 
ing as  a  part  owner  on  paper  of  that  Avealth  in  the  per 
capita  calculations  of  Illinois  in  the  Census  Commis- 
sioner's report. 

Only  about  one-tenth  of  the  population  of  the  State 
of  Illinois  over  ten  years  of  age,  according  to  the  last  census 
report,  was  engaged  in  manufacture  and  mining,  while 
the  State  of  Pennsylvania  thus  employed  over  one-fifth, 
and  the  State  of  Massachusetts  nearly  one-third. 

Suppose  the  aggregate  estimated  wealth  of  Illinois 
was  divided  among  the  remaining  nine-tenths  of  her 
population  above  ten  j^ears,  that  of  Pennsylvania  among 
the  remaining  four-fifths,  and  that  of  Massachusetts 
among  the  remaining  two-thirds,  would  not  this  per 
capita  calculation  show  a  more  glaring  discrepancy  in  the 
relative  effect  of  protection  upon  the  prosperity  of  the 
agricultural  and  manufacturing  sections  of  the- country, 
resjDectively  ? 

THE    "  HOME  MARKET  "    FALLACY. 

"But,,  don't  you  see,  my  granger  friend,"  we  hear  the 
manufacturers  say,  "do  we  not  furnish  3^011  with  a 
permanent,  adequate  and  profitable  home  market  for 
ninety   per  cent   of  all  you  are  producing?     Will  you 


THE   EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   ON   FARMERS.  73 

throw  away  the  chance  of  keeping  such  reliable  cash  cus- 
tomers who  are  furnishing  you  with  a  ready  market,  and 
thereby,  in  a  large  measure,  saving  you  all  the  expense  of 
ocean  transportation,  for  the  uncertainty  of  the  for- 
eign market?  Don't  you  see  the  more  men  the  manufact- 
urers can  employ  the  more  mouths  there  are  for  you  to 
feed,  and  the  more  money  they  are  making  the  more  they 
can  pay  you  for  your  produce  ?  Don't  believe  those  '  free 
trade  theorists,'  because  your  interests  are  identical  with 
ours,  and  by  helping  us  with  your  vote  in  maintaining 
the  protective  system  you  are  helping  yourself." 

Such  are  the  sophistries  preached  to  our  farmers  to 
reconcile  them  to  their  pack-mule  fate.  The  term 
"  home-market "  is  as  deceptive  as  the  term  "  protection," 
and  is  used  by  the  protectionist  to  mislead  the  farmer  in 
the  same  manner  as  "protection  to  home  labor"  is  used 
to  mislead  the  working-man.  But  the  catchword  "  pro- 
tection "  against  the  pauper  labor  of  Europe,  which  has 
proven  so  effective  with  the  working-men,  cannot  suc- 
cessfully be  used  with  the  farmer.  To  rob  him  in  safety 
and  to  use  his  vote  to  perpetuate  the  system,  the  catch- 
word "  home-market "  had  to  be  invented.  It  has  ren- 
dered excellent  service  in  benumbing-  the  understanding: 
of  the  farmer  of  the  grain-growing  States  of  Illinois, 
Iowa,  Kansas,  Nebraska,  Wisconsin  and  Michigan,  and 
will,  no  doubt,  do  so  again.  It  is  sought  to  impress  the 
farmer  with  the  idea,  that  the  encouragement  and  exten- 
sion of  manufacturing  industries  are  what  the  farmer  is  in 
need  of  in  order  to  dispose  of  all  his  products  at  home; 
that  if  the  import  of  foreign  commodities  was  prohibited 
so  that  the  American  manufacturers  could  monopolize 
the  supply,  the  additional  working-men  required  by  these 
manufacturers  would  increase  the  demand  for  agricultural 


74  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

produce,  to  such  an  extent,  as  to  render  the  export  of  the 
small  surplus  of  ten  per  cent  of  the  whole  product  quite 
unnecessary. 

Where  these  additional  working-men  are  to  come 
from,  whether  they  intend  to  import  them  on  the  free- 
trade-in-labor  plan,  or  whether  they  would  draw  them 
from  other  occupations  which  are  getting  along  without 
protection  they  carefully  avoid  to  state. 

If  it  means  more  foreign  labor,  we  are  at  a  loss  to  dis- 
cover the  benefit  to  the  American  working-men ;  if  it 
means  to  transfer  labor  from  the  farm  or  other  unpro- 
tected industries,  we  cannot  see  how  this  shift  of  employ- 
ment will  increase  the  demand  for  agricultural  produce. 

Should  a  farmer,  a  barber  or  a  house-servant  change 
his  occupation  by  working  in  coal  mines,  in  an  iron 
foundry  or  in  a  woolen  mill,  he  would  probably  consume 
as  much  food  as  he  did  before;  that  is,  if  he  could  get  it. 
In  order  to  fortify  their  "  home-market "  theory,  protec- 
tionists are  prone  to  talk  flippantly  of  the  small  surplus  of 
agricultural  products  which  is  exported,  and,  relying  on 
the  credulity  of  the  people,  venture  to  state  that  the  aver- 
age amount  of  such  export  to  be  but  ten  per  cent  of  the 
whole  product. 

What  are  the  facts  in  the  case?  From  the  census  re- 
port of  1880,  it  appears  that  the  grand  total  farm  product 
of  that  year  was  valued  at  about  $2,500,000,000.  .  Of  this 
produce  an  amount  to  the  value  of  $242,000,000  was  cot- 
ton, of  which  $211,000,000  was  exported,  leaving  cereals 
and  provisions  to  the  value  of  $2,289,000,000.  Of  this 
amount  $375,000,000  worth  was  exported,  leaving  $1,914,- 
000,000  worth  to  be  consumed  at  home.  It  is  to  be  sup- 
posed that  the  farmers  of  the  North  and  the  cotton- 
growers    of    the  South,  who   with    their   families  and 


THE    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS.  75 

dependents  numbering  one-half  of  our  population,  have 
as  good  appetites  as  the  mechanics  or  tradesmen,  and  it 
stands  to  reason,  therefore,  that  they  absorbed  one-half  of 
our  agricultural  products,  or  about  $950,000,000  worth 
themselves. 

The  remaining  half  must,  accordingly,  have  been  con- 
sumed by  the  three  millions  of  persons  and  their  families 
in.  protected  industries,  and  by  the  seven  millions  of  per- 
sons and  their  families  employed  in  the  other  pursuits. 
To  be  liberal,  we  will  say  that  the  latter  seven  million  per- 
sons with  their  families  consumed  only  two-thirds,  or 
$620,000,000  worth,  leaving  $330,000,000  worth  to  the 
protected  classes  —  would  not  this  comparatively  small  per- 
centage constitute  the  home  market  furnished  by  the 
manufacturers,  or  $45,000,000  less  than  the  value  of  prod- 
ucts sent  abroad  to  the  "  European  paupers  "  % 

But  the  absolutely  unanswerable  fact,  in  proof  that 
this  home  market  theory  is  nothing  but  a  precious  pretext 
to  beguile  the  farmers  into  the  support  of  this  protective 
system,  is  furnished  by  the  official  statements  of  imports 
and  exports  published  by  the  Treasury  Department  for 
the  sixteen  years  ending  1887,  from  which  it  appears  that 
$4,280,576,088  worth  of  breadstuffs  and  provisions,  mainly 
the  products  of  our  "Western  farmers,  were  exported  to 
Europe. 

This  fact  alone  should  be  sufficient  to  absolutely  dis- 
pose of  the  absurd  claim  of  the  protectionists  that  it  is  the 
"home  market,"  created  by  the  protected  industries, 
which  secures  prosperity  to  the  farmer,  and  that  an  in- 
crease of  manufactories  would  absorb  all  agricultural  sur- 
plus. Where  was  the  "  home  market,"  with  its  all-absorb- 
ing qualities,  during  those  sixteen  years  of  high  pro- 
tection?   The  exports  of  cereals  and  of  cotton  since  1870, 


76  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

from  year  to  year,  have  been  on  the  increase  in  spite  of 
protection  and  in  spite  of  the  enormous  increase  of  manu- 
factories. 

When  it  is  considered,  that,  according  to  the  most 
reliable  estimates,  the  existing  manufacturing  plants,  if 
worked  during  eight  months  in  the  year  to  their  full 
capacity,  are  able  to  fully  supply  the  home  demand,  it  is 
evident  that  the  protectionists,,  in  talking  of  an  increase 
of  manufacturies  to  absorb  the  agricultural  surplus,  have 
succeeded  in  "argumenting"  themselves  into  a  cul-de-sac. 

Now  let  us  see  what  has  become  of  the  $-±,280,576,088 
received  by  the  farmers,  less  freight,  commission  and  in- 
surance, in  pay  for  their  products  in  the  course  of  sixteen 
years.  What  have  they  to  show  for  this  plethora  of  gold 
thrown  into  their  laps  b}r  their  pauper  customer  ?  If  the}^ 
have  not  been  able  to  meet  their  expenses ;  if,  instead  of 
growing  prosperous  and  pecuniarily  independent  with  all 
this  enormous  wealth,  they  are  unable  to  keep  their  heads 
above  water;  if  the  agriculturists  are  in  debt;  if  a  large 
number  of  their  farms  are  mortgaged,  there  must  be  a 
screw  loose  somewhere.* 

The  Western  farmer  is  reputed  to  live  comfortably,  but 
he  is  not  known  to  be  a  spendthrift,  and  if  he  were 
allowed  to  dispose  of  his  earnings  to  the  best  advantage, 

*The  exact  amount  of  the  mortgage  debt  of  the  Western  states  can 
only  approximately  b3  given.  According  to  the  estimates  made  by  Mr. 
Harris,  a  Chicago  banker,  a  little  over  a  year  ago,  the  mortgaged  indebt- 
edness of  the  farmers  in  the  ten  Western  states  is  as  follows  : 

Ohio ..$350,000,000 

Indiana 175,000,1 

Illinois 20(1. 0(H). o(ii) 

Wisconsin, 100,000,000 

Michigan 125,000,000 

Total  indebtedness,  $1,295,000,000.  Upon  this  enormous  amount, 
which  is  rather  below  than  above  the  actual  figure,  these  farmers  have 
to  pay  a  yearly  interest  of  nearly  one  hundred  million  dollars. 


Minnesota $  70,000,000 

Iowa 100,000,000 

Nebraska 25,000,000 

Kansas 50,000,000 

Missouri 100,000,000 


THE    EFFECT   OF    PROTECTION    OX    FARMERS.  YY 

as  he  understands  it,  there  is  no  earthly  reason  why  he 
should  not  be  as  prosperous  and  happy  as  the  Pennsyl- 
vania manufacturer. 

In  order  to  furnish  our  Western  farmer  with  the  "  cold 
facts1'  in  regard  to  the  manner  in  which  he  is  robbed  by 
this  protective  system,  and  to  make  it  absolutely  clear  to 
him,  that  the  difference  between  the  price  of  the  "pro- 
tected" article,  and  what  the  price  would  be  "without 
protection,"  is  the  precise  amount  of  the  tax  exacted  from 
him  by  the  home  manufacturer,  we  will  illustrate,  by 
taking  the  case  of  a  farmer  who,  with  his  family  has 
settled  upon  a  100  acre  tract  of  prairie  land  in  the  state 
of  Illinois.  With  cash  in  hand  he  has  purchased  all  the 
material  necessary  for  fencing  the  land  ;  for  the  building  of 
a  moderate  sized  dwelling  and  barn;  making  the  first  out- 
lays for  farming  utensils,  household  and  kitchen  furniture  ; 
for  bedding  and  wearing-apparel,  and  articles  of  daily 
consumption.  The  price  of  each  article  as  it  appears 
to-day  in  the  market  reports  and  in  the  price  list  of  mer- 
chants and  domestic  manufacturers  has  been  classified  in 
three  separate  columns,  the  one  containing  the  price  of 
the  article  "  protected,"  the  other,  the  price  the  farmer 
would  pay  "  without  protection,"  and  the  third  containing 
the  "  manufacturers' tax,"  or  what  is  called  the  percentage 
of  import  duty,  reduced  to  dollars  and  cents. 

Particular  pains  have  been  taken  to  avoid  exaggeration, 
the  amount  of  the  tax  being  rather  under  than  over  esti- 
mated. 

By  comparing  the  price  of  imported  goods,  less  the 
amount  of  the  tariff,  the  farmer,  who  is  not  simple 
enough  to  believe  in  the  protectionist  theory  that  the 
duty  on  the  foreign  article  does  not  enhance  the  price  of 
the  domestic  product,  will  find  our  "  manufacturer's  tax" 
compilation  substantially  correct. 


78 


THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 


MATERIALS  FOR  FARM  HOUSE. 

DOMESTIC  MANUFACTURES. 

Prices 
with 
Protec- 
tion 

Prices 
with- 
out 

Protec- 
tion 

Manu- 
factur- 
ers' 
tax. 

6  m  Feet  Joints  and  Scantling 

5  m  Feet  Flooring 

$78  00 
80  00 
15  60 
77  00 
30  00 

150  00 
12  60 
45  00 

161  00 
92  00 
50  00 
25  00 

$66  00 
60  00 
13  20 
70  00 
25  80 

1C0  00 
11  60 
35  00 

131  00 
85  61 
30  00 
18  00 

,$12  00 
20  «  0 

1,200  Feet  Common  Boards 

Z%  m  Feet  Siding 

2  40 

7  00 

4  20 

25  Doors  and  Windows 

20  00 

450  Feet  Base-boards 

1  00 

Front  Stairs 

10  00 

Plaster,  Lime,  Hair  and  Lath 

30  00 

182  Feet  Cornice 

6  36 

Paint 

20  00 

7  00 

Total 

$676  24 

$139  96 

MATERIALS  FOR  BARN. 

Prices 
withPro- 
tection. 

Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 

Manu- 
facture 

tax. 

3,000  feet  Siding 

$75  00 

$69  00 

21  00 

3  40 

3  40 

1  70 

6  20 

31  00 

30  40 

20  00 

16  80 

13  40 

46  00 

42  00 

3  50 

3  00 

$6  00 

1  50 

1,500  Rafters 

22  50 
4  00 

4  00 
2  00 
7  00 

35  00 
33  00 
25  00 
20  00 
16  00 
50  00 
48  00 
6  00 

5  00 

300  Sills 

CO 

300  Stringers. 

00 

150  Plates . 

30 

400  Posts 

80 

2,000  Sheetin-r 

4  00 

1,300  Upper   Floor 

2  60 

2,500  Lower  Floor 

5  oo 

1,300  Upper  Joists 

3  20 

2  60 

2,000  Bin  Lumber 

4  00 

16,000  Shingles 

6  00 

200  lbs  Nails 

■     2  5D 

2  00 

Total 

$310  80 

$41  r,0 

FENCING. 

OUTSIDE. 


22  m  Fencing  Lumber 

2  m  Fence  Posts , 

200  lbs.  Fencing  Nails 
2  prs.  Hinges , 


Prices 
withPro- 
tection. 


$440  0U 

200  00 

6  00 

2  00 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


$396  00 

160  00 

3  50 

1  00 


Manu- 
factur'rs 

tax. 


$44  00 

40  00 

2  50 

1  00 


THE    EFFECT   OF    PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS. 


Y9 


5  m  Fencing  Lumber 

1  m  Fence  Posts 

100  lbs.  Fencing  Nails 

2  Pairs  Small  Hinges 

2,00:)  lbs.  Barbed  Wire 

500  Pickets 

300  ft.  Planed  2x4 

150  ft.  Planed  12  inch  lumber. 
20  Sawed  Posts 


Total $884  00  $754  40  $129  60 


Prices 
with  Pro- 
tection. 


100  00 

100  00 

3  00 

1  50 
12  00 

5  00 
7  00 

2  50 
5  00 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


90  00 

80  00 

1  80 

1  00 
6  00 

4  00 

5  60 

2  00 

3  50 


Manu- 
factures 
tax. 


10  00 

20  00 

1  20 

50 

6  00 

1  00 

1  40 

50 

1  50 


FARM  MACHINERY. 


1  Wagon 

1  Reaper 

1  Mower 

3  Breaking  Plows. . . 
3  Double  Cultivators. 

1  Harrow 

1  Hay  Rake 

1  Wheat  Drill 

1  Corn  Planter 

1  Fanning  Mill , 

1  Feed  Cutter 

1  Wheeelbarrow..   . . 
1  Grind  Stone 


Total. 


Prices 
withPro- 
tection- 


$75  00 

350  00 

150  00 

45  00 

45  00 

10  00 

25  00 

50  00 

25  00 

25  00 

15  00 

5  00 

3  00 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


$60  00 

275  00 

130  00 

35  00 

30  00 

8  00 

20  00 

35  00 

20  00 

20  00 

12  00 

4  00 

2  50 


$823  00  $651  50 


Manu- 
facture 

tax. 


$15  00 
75  00 
20  00 
10  00 
15  00 

2  00 
5  00 

15  00 
5  00 
5  00 

3  00 
1  00 

50 


$171  50 


FARM  IMPLEMENTS  AND  SUPPLIES. 


Prices 
withPro- 

tection. 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


Manu- 
factures 

Tax. 


3  sets  dbl.  Harness. 

2  Hatters 

2  Bridles 

2  Saddles 

2  Hoes... ,... 

1  Spade 

1  Garden  Rake  . . . 

3  Pitchforks 

1  Scythe 


$100  00 

2  00 

2  00 

20  00 


^75  00 

1  50 

2  25 
14  55 

1  20 
70 
30 

3  00 

2  25 


$25  00 
50 
75 
5  45 
30 
30 
20 
1  00 
75 


80 


THE    PROTECTIVE   TAEIFF. 


FARM  IMPLEMENTS  AND  SUPPLIES. 


1  Hatchet 

2  Saws 

1  Drawing  Knife 

2  Pumps 

1  Axe 

1  Log  Chain 

6  pr.  Trace  Chains 

3  Double-trees  and  Whiffle-trees. 
1  Brush 

1  Curry  Comb 

2  Files 

20  Seamless  Bags 

1  Scoop  Shovel 

1  Basket 


Total $181  70  $134  09 


Prices 
withPro- 
tection. 


50 

2  00 

1  00 

20  00 

1  00 

5  00 

6  00 

2  50 
50 
20 
50 

5  00 
1  50 


00 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


35 

1  25 

65 

16  00 

75 


Manu- 
factures 
Tax. 


15 
75 
35 
00 
25 
00 
00 
50 
12 
05 
21 
55 
30 
04 
61 


HOUSEHOLD  FURNITURE. 


1  Heating  Stove 

1  Zinc 

6  Joints  Pipe 

2  Glass  Lamps 

2  Rattan  Rockers 

6  Wooden  Chairs 

50  Yards  Carpet 

10  Square  Yards  Oil  Cloth. 

3  Bedroom  Sets 

1  Clock 

6  Window  Shades 

12  Towels 

1  Pair  Scissors 

3  Spring  Beds 

3  "Wool  Mattresses 

6  Pairs  Wool  Blankets. . . . 
50  Yards  Sheeting 

1  Dozen  Comforts 

2  Looking  Glasses 

3  Coverlets 

2  Combs  and  Brushes 


Total 


Prices 
withPio- 

Prices 
without 
protec- 
tion. 

Manu- 
facturers 

tection. 

Tax. 

$10  35 

4  65 

1  00 

60 

40 

60 

34 

28 

1  50 

1  03 

47 

7  00 

5  18 

1  82 

3  00 

2  22 

78 

40  00 

30  00 

10  00 

5  00 

3  56 

1  44 

75  00 

55  55 

19  45 

4  00 

2  96 

1  04 

3  00 

2  07 

93 

4  00 

2  96 

1  04 

50 

.  37 

13 

15  00 

10  00 

5  (0 

15  00 

9  09 

5  91 

18  00 

11  25 

6  75 

10  00 

7  50 

2  50 

12  00 

10  00 

2  00 

5  00 

3  12 

1  88 

3  00 

2  25 

75 

2  00 

1  54 

48 

$239  60 

$171  94 

$67  66 

THE    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS. 


81 


KITCHEN  FUBNITUUIi 

Prices 

with-out 

Pro- 
tects in . 

Manu- 
factures' 
tax. 

60 
5  00 
3  00 

3  00 

2  00 
50 
50 

1  50 
1  25 
1  50 

60 
1  00 
1  20 

70 
10  00 

3  00 
3  00 

50 

2  01 

1  3d 

2  01 

0  52 

1  30 
44 
35 

3  70 

2  22 
2  22 
1  48 

37 

34 

1  00 

7:; 

1  11 
44 
74 
96 
42 

6  45 

2  22 
2  07 

34 

§12  00 

1  lot  Tin  Cooking  Utensils 

93 

2  Iron  Kettles 

70 

1  Copper  Kettle 

93 

6  Sheet  Iron  Pans 

2  48 

6  Ash  Bucket 

70 
31 

1  Joints  Stove  Pipe 

25 

1  Table 

1  30 

6  Cli airs 

78 

1  Doz  Knives  and  Forks 

78 

2  Doz.  Spoons 

52 

1  Butcher  Knife 

13 

1  Coal  Oil  Can 

16 

6  Flat  Irons 

50 

1  Wash  Boiler 

2  Tubs     

52 
39 

2  Pails 

10 

26 

6  Crocks 

24 

2  Washboards  (zinc) 

28 

2  doz.  Dishes  Asst'd 

3  55 

2  Table  Cloths , 

78 

2  lot  Glassware 

93 

16 

Total 

$85  60 

$55 

$29  74 

HOUSEHOLDERS'  WARDROBE. 


1  Work  Suit 

1  Good  Suit 

1  Overcoat 

*2  Flannel  Shirts  . . 

2  Flannel  Drawers. 

6  Wool  Socks 

1  Wool  Hat 

1  Wool  Cap 

1  pair  Boots 

1     "  Shoes 

1  "  Rubber  Boots 
1  "  Suspenders.  . 
1  '■  Buck  Gloves. 
1     "  Wool  Gloves. 


Prices 
withPro- 
teetion. 


$7  00 

20  00 

15  00 

1  50 

1  50 

2  00 


Prices 
without 
Protec- 
tion. 


$4  73 
13  52 
10  15 
86 
86 
14 
71 
57 
00 


Manu- 
facture' 
Tax. 


$2  27 

6  48 

4  85 

64 

64 

86 

1  29 

43 

1  00 

70 

60 

14 

37 

21 


82 


THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 


HOUSEHOLDERS1  WARDROBE. 


1  Wool  Scarf 

1  Rubber  Coat 

1  Umbrella 

3  Linen  Hdfs 

1  Silk  Tie 

1  Razor 

1  Pocket  Knife 

1  Shaving  Brush 

1  Cake  Shaving  Soap. 

1  Neck  Comfort 

*4  Cotton  Shirts 

2  Pair  Cotton  Drawers 

Total 


Prices 
withPro- 
tection. 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


29 
2  69 
66 
74 
33 
83 
83 
26 
11 
29 
2  25 
69 


70  $53  99   $2471 


Manu- 
factures 
Tax. 


21 
81 
34 
26 
17 
42 
42 
09 
04 
21 
75 
31 


HOUSEWIFE'S  WARDROBE. 


3  Calico  Dresses , 

3      "      Aprons 

2  Woolen  Dresses 

2  Balmoral  skirts 

2  Cotton  Skirts 

2  Suits  Flannels 

2  ' '     Cotton  Underwear. . 

3  pr.  Cotton  Hose 

3   "    Wool       "     

1  Woolen  Cloak 

1         "       Shawl 

1        "       Hood 

1  Straw  Bonnet 

2  pairs  Shoes 

1     "      Rubbers 

1  Parasol 

1  Veil 

5  yds.  Ribbons 

3  Linen  Collars 

3  prs.  Linen  Cuffs 

3  "  -  Handkerchiefs 

1  Tuck  Comb 

1  Tooth  Brush 

1  pair  Wool  Mitts 

1    "    Gloves 

Total 


Prices 
withPro- 

Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 

tection. 

$2  25 

$1  75 

50 

40 

16  00 

9  40 

3  00 

1  9!' 

1  50 

1  25 

3  00 

1  71 

2  00 

1  42 

1  00 

71 

1  50 

90 

12  00 

8  11 

6  00 

3  21 

1  25 

71 

1  00 

77 

4  00 

3  20 

50 

40 

2  00 

1"60 

70 

46 

50 

33 

50 

38 

60 

46 

75 

55 

25 

18 

35 
50 

27 
29 

1  25 

78 

$61  90 

$40  14 

Manu- 
factures 
Tax. 

50 

10 

6  60 

1  10 

25 

1  29 

58 

29 

60 

3  89 

^  79 

54 

23 

80 

10 

40 

24 

17 

12 

14 

20 

7 

8 

21 

47 


&21  76 


THE    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    FARMERS. 


83 


TWO  BOYS'  WARDROBE. 


2  Work  Suits 

2  Good      "     

2  Overcoats 

6  Flannel  Shirts 

6  White        "       

4  pairs  Wool  Drawers. 
6    "         "     Socks.... 

2  "     Hats 

2  "      Caps 

2  pairs  Boots. 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 


Suspenders 

Rubber  Boots. . . 
"       Shoes... 

Wool  Mitts 

Buck  Gloves 

2  Neckties  (silk) 

4  Linen  Handkerchiefs. 
2  Neck  Comforters 


Total. 


Prices 
withPro- 
tectiou. 


$10  00 
30  00 
30  00 
6  00 
4  00 
4  00 
2  00 
4  00 
2  00 
00 
00 
0(1 
00 
00 
00 
50 
00 
00 


$117  50 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


$6  76 

20  70 

20  70 

3  42 

3  25 

2  28 

1  14 

2  28 
1  14 
6  40 

72 


$81  25 


Manu 

factur'rs 

Tax. 


$3  24 

9  30 

9  30 

2  58 

75 

1  72 

86 

1  72 

86 

1  60 

28 

1  40 

80 

33 

75 

17 

26 

33 


$36  25 


TWO  GIRLS'  WARDROBES. 


4  Calico  Dresses 

4       "      Aprons 

2  Alpaca  Dresses 

2  Wool  "      

2  Balmoral  Skirts 

4  Cotton  Skirts 

4  Suits  Flannels 

4      "    Cot.  Uuderware 

6  Pair  Cot.  Hose 

6    "    Wool    "    

2  Woolen  Cloaks 

2        "       Shawls 

2        "       Hoods 

2  Straw  Hats 

4  Pairs  Shoes 

2      "     Rubbers 

2  Parasol 

2  Veils 

12  Yards  Ribbon 

6  Linen  Collars 

6  Pair  Linen  Cuffs 

2  Round  Combs 

6  Handkerchief 


wPrices 
fithPro- 
ection. 

Prices 
without 
Protec- 

tion. 

$3  00 

$2  50 

1  00 

85 

18  00 

10  60 

8  00 

5  00 

3  00 

1  90 

3  00 

2  00 

5  00 

2  86 

4  00 

2  13 

2  00 

1  42 

3  00 

1  80 

30  90 

20  28 

10  00 

5  33 

2  00 

1  20 

2  00 

1  54 

8  00 

6  40 

1  00 

80 

3  50 

2  80 

1  50 

1  00 

1  20 

80 

1  00 

77 

1  20 

92 

30 

22 

2  00 

1  48 

Manu- 
factures 
ITax. 


50 

15 

40 

00 

10 

00 

14 

87 

58 

1  20 

9  72 

4  67 

80 

46 

1  60 

20 

70 

50 

40 

23 

28 

8 

52 


81 


THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 


TWO  GIRLS'  WARDROBES. 


2  Pairs  Wool  Mitts. 

2    "     Gloves 

2  Tooth  Brushes... 


Total 


Prices 
with  Pro. 
tection 


1 

00 

o 

00 

50 

$117  20 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


57 

1  25 

39 


$76  81 


Manu- 
facture 

Tax. 


43 
75 
11 


$40  3 ) 


DOMESTIC  SUPPLIES. 


Sugar 

Tea 

Coffee 

Molasses 

Salt 

Vinegar 

Rice 

Soda 

Soap—  Castile 

Wire  Clothes  Line 

Starch 

Carpet  Tacks. 

Nails 

Thread 

Needles 

Pens 

Ink 

Paper 

Pins 

Hairpins 

Glycerine 

Total 


Prices 
withPro- 
tection. 


$1  00 
50 
50 
50 
1  00 
50 

1  00 
25 
25 

2  00 
25 
25 
50 

1  00 
25 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
50 


$10  75 


Prices 
without 

Pro- 
tection. 


$7  08 


Manii- 

faetur'rs 

tax. 


32 


10 
26 
13 
57 
11 
9 
00 
12 
11 
13 
35 
05 
03 
03 
02 
02 
03 
20 


$3  67 


SUMMARY. 


MATERIALS  FOR  PERMANENT  IMPROVE- 
MENTS. 


Materials  for  House. 

Materials  for  Barn  . . 

Materials  for  Fence. 

Totals 


Total 
amount 
without 

Manu- 
facturers 

Tax. 


$676  24 
310  80 
754  40 

1,741  44 


Manu- 
factures 
Tax. 


$139  96 

41  70 

129  60 


$311  26 


Amount 

paid  on 

account 

of  the 

Tax. 

$816  20 
352  50 
884  00 


$2,052.70 


Increased  cost  on  account  of  manufacturer's  tax,  18  per  cent. 


THE    EFFECT    OF   RROTECTION    ON    FARMERS. 


85 


FARM  MACHINERY  AND  SUPPLIES. 


Total 
amount 
without 

Manu- 
factur'rs 

Tax. 


Manu- 
factures 
Tax. 


Amount 

paid  on 

account 

of  the 

Tax. 


Farm  Machinery 

Implements  and  Supplies. 
Totals 


5651  50 
104  09 


$171  50 
47  61 


$S23  00 
181  70 


-S5  59 


$219  11 


1,004  70 


Increased  cost  on  account  of  manufacturer's  tax,  28  per  cent. 


FURNITURE. 

Total 
amount 
without 

Manu- 
facture 

Tax. 

Manu- 
factures 
Tax. 

Amount 

paid  on 

account 

of  the 

Tax. 

Household  Furniture 

$171  9* 
55  86 

$67  66 
29  74 

$239  60 
85  60 

Kitchen  Furniture 

Totals 

$227  80 

$97  40 

$325  20 

Increased  cost  on  account  of  manufacturer's  tax,  43  per  cent, 


ARTICLES  OF  DOMESTIC  CONSUMPTION. 


Householder's  Wardrobe 
Housewife's  " 

Two  Boys'  " 

Two  Girls' 

Domestic  Supplies ... 
Totals 


Total 
amount 
without 
Manu- 
factures 

Tax. 


$53  99 

40  14 

81  25 

76  81 

7  08 


$259  27 


Manu- 
factures 
Tax. 


$24  71 

21  76 

36  25 

40  39 

3  67 


$126  78 


Amount 

paid  on 

account 

of  the 

Tax. 


$78  70 

61  90 

117  50 

117  20 

10  75 


$386  05 


Increased  cost  on  account  of  manufacturer's  tax,  49  per  cent. 

Now  if  after  a  scrutiny  of  the  above  items,  those  of  our 
Illinois  farmers,  who,  under  the  wholesome  threat  that  the 
Confederate  debt  would  be  assumed  and  African  slavery 
restored,  have  been  induced  to  support  the  straight  G.  O.  P. 
ticket,  and  to  vote  for  congressmen  supporting  this  double- 


86  THE    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    FAKMEKS. 

action  s}Tstem  would  take  a  look  at  their  account  books 
and  see  how  much  money  they  have  spent  for  house- 
hold goods,  for  farming  utensils,  lumber,  etc.,  etc.,  during 
the  high  protection  period,  and  deduct  the  percentage  of 
the  tax  (the  farmers  usually  not  buying  imported  goods), 
the  result  would  serve  as  an  eye-opener  to  make  clear 
to  them,  where  the  lion's  share  of  the  $4,280,576,088 
has  gone.  It  would  also  give  our  Illinois  farmer,  more 
particularly,  an  inkling  how  it  happened,  that  during  the 
twenty  years  of  protection,  the  manufacturing  but  nat- 
urally poor  commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  accumulated 
twice  as  much  wealth  as  did  his  own  State,  while  dur- 
ing the  ten  years  preceding,  when  the  low  tariff  system 
prevailed,  the  wealth  of  Illinois  had  trebled,  that  of 
Massachusetts  only  increasing  fifteen  per  cent. 

And  after  a  careful  "  rekonin  "  it  might,  perhaps,  dawn 
upon  our  farmer  that  for  every  dollar's  purchase  made  for 
his  household  and  farm  he  has  been  paying  fifty  cents  more 
for  the  benefit  of  somebody  else.  Should  he  "figger" 
a  little  further  and  add  up  these  extra  fifty  cents  on  these 
dollar  purchases  during  the  twenty  years  of  protection,  he 
would  doubtless  find  that  the  sum  total  exceeds  the  amount 
he  was  compelled  to  borrow  from  a  New  England  Loan 
and  Trust  Association  to  keep  going,  and  that,  conse- 
quently, but  for  this  extra  tax  he  would  have  a  small 
amount  of  savings  in  his  little  tin  box  instead  of  a  copy 
of  a  good-sized  mortgage  upon  his  farm. 

This  might  set  him  to  thinking  also  where  that "  Boston 
money"  all  comes  from,  since  he  has  never  heard  of  gold 
or  silver  mines,  or,  in  fact,  of  any  other  great  natural  re- 
sources in  any  of  the  New  England  States  —  ice  and  sea- 
weed excepted. 

If  after  considering  these  things  our  Illinois  farmer 


THE    PROTECTIVE    TAKIFF.  87 

has  a  thimble-full  of  brains  left,  he  will  perceive  that,  while 
this  "home  market"  theory  is  undoubtedly  a  very  "soft 
thing  "  for  his  New  England  brethren,  it  is  an  exceedingly 
"  hard  thing  "  for  him.  It  might  then,  also,  occur  to  him 
that  in  voting  these  long  years  for  the  men  "  who  saved 
the  Union,"  for  "  protection  to  home  industry  "  and  such 
balderdash,  he  has  been  voting  a  good  share  of  the  pro- 
ceeds of  his  own  "  industry  "  into  the  pockets  of  the  east- 
ern manufacturers. 

Now,  if  this  system  had  the  indemnifying  effect  of 
enhancing  the  price  of  things  the  farmer  has  to  sell  corre- 
spondingly with  the  price  of  things  he  has  to  buy,  this  extra 
burden  would  not  be  so  oppressive  to  bear ;  but  the  very 
opposite  has  always  been  the  effect  of  the  protective  tariff 
in  this  country. 

The  market  reports  of  the  leading  daily  and  commer- 
cial papers  of  the  country  for  the  last  fifty  years  show, 
that  the  introduction  of  high  protective  tariff s  was  invari- 
ably followed  by  a  reduction  in  prices  of  farmers'  products, 
while  under  the  low  tariffs  the  prices  increased. 

From  1842  to  18-1-6,  for  instance,  when  the  tariff  was 
excessively  protective,  the  average  price  of  wheat  was 
eighty-two  cents  and  corn  forty-eight  cents  per  bushel. 
From  1846  to  1850,  under  the  low  tariff  system,  wheat 
averaged  $1.10  and  corn  fifty-seven  cents.  But  on  the 
6th  of  July,  1S87,  after  a  quarter  of  a  century  of  high 
protection,  the  price  of  red  winter  wheat,  which  had  been 
declining  from  year  to  year,  was  quoted  in  the  Chicago 
market  at  seventy  cents  and  corn  at  thirty-nine  and  one- 
half  cents  per  bushel. 

Then  there  is  the  item  of  transportation  which  bears 
heavier  upon  the  western  farmer  than  upon  any  other 
industry.     Low  freight  means  high  returns  to  the  farmer, 


88  THE    EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION   ON    FARMERS. 

and  every  species  of  taxation,  every  public  measure 
which,  directly  or  indirectly,  enhances  the  cost  of  trans- 
portation draws  directly  upon  the  pocket  of  the  farmer. 

Volumes  have  been  written  and  thousands  of  speeches 
made,  and  perhaps  justly,  about  overcharges  by  railroads 
and  their  large  dividends  Upon  watered  stock.  Farmers 
themselves  have  organized  into  innumerable  granges  in 
order  to  more  effectually  resist  the  extortions  of  railroad 
monopolies,  and  last,  but  not  least,  Congress  has  called 
into  existence  an  Inter-State  Commission  to  keep  the 
transportation  companies  within  bounds.  But  very  little 
if  anything  has  been  said  about  the  fact  that  these  com- 
panies were  prevented  by  the  United  States  government 
in  the  first  place  from  building  their  roads  with  as  little 
expense  as  possible. 

In  1880  we  had  115,000  miles  of  railroads,  80,000  of 
which  have  been  built  under  high  protection  for  the  Penn- 
sylvania iron-masters.  One  hundred  tons  of  rails  are 
required  for  each  mile  of  road,  upon  which  a  duty  of 
$28  a  ton  was  collected,  making  the  increase  paid  $224,- 
000,000.  The  duty  on  the  finer  iron  entering  into  the 
manufacture  of  the  rolling-stock  of  the  roads  has  been 
estimated  as  large  as  the  duty  on  the  rails,  thus  enhancing 
the  cost  to  $448,000,000.  Taking  the  duty  for  the  iron 
used  in  building  bridges  and  the  increased  cost  on 
tools  and  articles  consumed  by  laborers,  we  have- a  grand 
total  additional  expense  of  $800,000,000,  upon  which 
at  least  the  interest  of  $50,000,000  has  had  to  be  paid 
annually  in  enhanced  freight  by  the  farmer. 

While  the  farmers  are  thus  steadily  and  systemat- 
ically bled  to  death,  the  great  bulk  of  their  products  is 
sold  both  in  Europe  and  in  the  home  market  at  prices 
fixed  in  London  and  Liverpool.      Should  any  of  them  be 


THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF.  8^ 

in  doubt  upon  tho  point,  let  him.  for  a  few  days  examine 
the  market  reports  of  Liverpool  and  London  and  compare 
them  with  those  of  New  York  and  Chicago. 

But  all  these  evils  and  exactions  which  the  farmer  has 
borne  for  twenty-five  years  are  insignificant  compared  to 
the  disastrous  consequences  which  are  in  store  for  him, 
and  which  must  inevitably  result  from  this  short-sighted, 
Chinese-wall  policy  of  isolation.  England,  with  whom  we 
have  persistently  refused  to  trade  upon  an  equitable 
basis,  has  been  looking  elsewhere  for  her  bread-stuff  sup- 
ply, and  finally  has  found  it  in  her  own  colonies,  the 
East  Indies  and  Australia.  Eight  years  ago  the  shipment 
of  wheat  from  India  was  too  small  to  be  quoted  at  Liver- 
pool, but  it  has  increased  from  year  to  year  until  now  it 
reaches  the  enormous  figure  of  sixty  millions  of  bushels  per 
year,  and  while  it  costs  our  western  farmer  from  thirty 
to  thirty-five  cents  to  raise  a  bushel  of  wheat,  the  cost  of 
production  in  India  is  less  than  twelve  cents  a  bushel. 

From  the  statement  of  the  British-India  office,  dated 
Calcutta,  February  12,  1886,  in  reference  to  the  prospect 
of  the  wheat  crop  for  1885-6,  it  appeared  that  the 
wheat  area  contained  nearly  25,000,000  acres.  As  a 
natural  consequence  of  this  additional  source  of  supply 
our  wheat  export  has  steadily  decreased  for  the  last  six 
years,  and  so  has  the  price. 

Under  such  circumstances  it  is  but  natural  that  the  land 
itself  upon  which  these  depreciated  products  are  raised 
is  diminishing  in  value.  It  is  a  fact  known  by  every 
farmer  in  the  west,  that  since  1870  the  value  of  farm-land 
in  the  western  states  has  steadily  decreased.  The  Chicago 
Herald  recently  compiled  a  most  interesting  and  compre- 
hensive table  from  the  last  United  States  census.  It  con- 
tains the  statistics  as  to  farm  values,  acreage,  and  popula- 


90  THE   PKOTECTIVF   TARIFF. 

tion  of  the  states  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  "Wisconsin, 
Michigan,  Minnesota,  Iowa,  Nebraska,  Kansas  and  Mis 
sonri.  The  (1)  line  shows  number  of  farms,  (2)  total 
farm  acreage,  (3)  their  improved  acreage,  (4)  actual  value, 

(5)  population : 

1850  1860 

1 441,597  972,132 

2 62,286,490  107,823,142 

3 26,683,000  52,302,000 

4 $751,719,000  $2,129,803,000 

5 5,463,587  9,091,879 

1870  1880 

1 1,123,358  1,680,533 

2 138,912,893  203,181,501 

3 77,967,000  135,687,000 

4 $4,312,415,000  $4,596,041 ,000 

5 12,961,930  17,228,934 

ISTo  question  can  be  raised  about  these  figures  except 
as  to  the  land  valuation  of  1870.  For  that  year  the 
average  gold  premium  is  stated  at  25.3  per  cent,  and  on 
them  had  doubtless  some  effect.  But  in  these  states  the 
increase  in  that  period  was  mainly  due  to  immigration 
and  to  the  return  of  the  dismissed  armies  with  their 
pockets  full  of  mone}^.  To  concede  a  5  cent  gain  for  the 
premium  is  more  than  any  theory  or  any  figures  will 
justify;  but  that  conceded,  and  the  calculations  on  that 
basis  for  the  land  values  of  1870,  these  are  the  deductions 
from  this  table :  The  (1)  line  shows  the  farm  value  in 
them  per  head  of  population,  (2)  the  average  value  of  the 
farm,  (3)  their  average  value  per  acre,  (4)  the  average  size 
of  the  farms,  (5)  the  average  on  them  of  improved  acres, 
(G)  the  proportionate  value  of  the  improved  acres,  regard- 
ing that  value  as  labor's  reward  for  opening  the  farms  : 

1050  1860  1870  1880 

1 $139.00  $234.00  $323.00  $266.00 

2 $1,702.00  $2,191.00  $3,743.00  $2,734.00 

3 $12.12  $18.41  $30.28  $22.61 

4 141  119  123.6  120.9 

5 60.4  53.8  69.4  80.7 

6 $27.10  $53.60  $40.70  $33.80 


THE   EFFECT   OF   PKOTECTION   ON   FARMERS.  91 

Each  of  these  decades  has  its  own  showing.  The  first 
shows  throughout  the  great  region  of  these  agricultural 
states  the  effect  on  land  values  of  a  moderate  tariff.  The 
second  is  complexed  with  the  effects  of  the  war.  The 
third  shows,  these  effects  having  ceased  to  be  operative, 
how  the  wealth  of  the  land  was  slowly  but  surely  absorbed 
by  the  "  manufacturing  centers."  The  demonstration  is 
conclusive.  Its  method  any  schoolboy  may  follow  and 
verify.  No  farmer  will  ponder  long  before  his  mind  is 
made  up. 

In  the  ten  years  when  the  tariff  was  for  revenue,  every 
$100  in  farm  values  per  head  of  the  population  grew  to 
$168.30.  Ten  years  of  protection  left  it  but  $82.40,  a  loss 
of  $85.90  in  land  values  in  all  these  states  for  every  living 
person  now  in  them.  Fifty-one  per  cent  of  what  would, 
under  equal  law,  have  been  the  values  of  the  farms,  has  been 
absorbed  hy  the  "  manufacturing  centers "  of  protec- 
tion. 

For  every  $100  in  the  farms,  commercial  freedom 
allowed  an  increase  to  $129.20,  and  protection  discounted 
it  to  but  $S3.  To  every  $100  of  acre  value,  free  trade 
added  $G1.90  and  protection  took  off  $28.60,  and  of  every 
$100  labor  for  those  ten  years  added  a  value  of  $90.70, 
while  protection  left  the  same  $100  but  $83.10.  The 
aggregate  of  the  loss  may  be  approximated,  203,181,501, 
but  for  the  drain  of  "  protection  "  would  have  held  their 
own  in  value  certainly  with  the  138,912,893  of  1870. 
They  would  then  have  been  worth  $6,152,335,000.  But 
the  gain  shown  between  1850  and  1860  is  more  probable. 
Then  the  beggerly  increase  of  9.2  per  cent  in  ten  years, 
with  a  population  increased  33  per  cent,  and  man's  power 
as  a  Avealth  producer  from  the  land  more  than  doubled  by 
machinery,  the  GS  per  cent  increase  of  those  ruder  da}Ts, 


92  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

between  1850  and  1800,  must  be  a  reasonable  estimate. 
In  that  case  the  loss  by  protection  in  the  value  of  these 
farm  lands  was  $2,171,121,000." 

The  same  deplorable  state  of  affairs  prevails  among  the 
farmers  in  the  Eastern  States,  principally  that  of  New 
York  and  those  of  New  England.  Next  to  Pennsylvania, 
no  state  with  enjoys  greater  natural  advantages  than  New 
York.  It  has  numerous  waterways  and  railroads,  insur- 
ing ready  transportation;  the  state  is  dotted  over  with 
large  manufacturing  centers,  and  the  great  commercial 
city  of  New  York  offers  the  farmer  as  steady  and  as 
profitable  a  market  as  is  offered  to  any  other  farmer  in  the 
country.  It  would  seem  that  if  the  home-market  furnishes 
the  agriculturist  advantages  anywhere,  it  would  be  in  the 
Empire  state. 

These  great  advantage;  notwithstanding,  it  is  of  com- 
mon report  that,  pecuniarily,  the  farmers  of  that  state  are 
to  a  large  extent  in  a,  very  precarious  condition,  and  that 
every  branch  of  husbandry  is  languishing.  Investigations 
made  by  local  agents,  selected  by  the  national  department 
of  agriculture,  disclose  the  fact  that  three-tenths  of  the 
farms  in  the  state  are  mortgaged,  on  an  average,  for  two- 
thirds  their  value,  and  that  one  person  in  every  twenty  is 
hopelessly  in  debt.  Farm  property  in  favored  localities 
has  declined  in  value  full  thirty-three  per  cent  during  the 
past  ten  years.  Many  farms  bought  on  time,  on  which 
half  the  payments  have  been  made,  would  not  sell  for 
enough  to  pay  the  money  still  due  on  them. 

One-third  of  all  the  farms  in  the  state  would  not  bring 
enough  to  pay  the  cost  of  the  buildings  and  other  improve- 
ments on  them.  A  good  farm  and  house  will  bring  a 
smaller  cash  rent  than  the  house  would  if  it  were  in  the 
nearest    village.     The    farms    are    very  few    that   pay 


THE   EFFECT    OF   PROTECTION    ON"    FARMERS.  93 

three  per  cent  on  their  value  over  and  above  all  expenses. 
Many  farmers  are  anxious  to  sell  out  and  to  invest  their 
money  in  securities  that  pay  four  or  five  per  cent  inter- 
est. In  many  sections  of  the  state  farm  buildings  and 
fences  are  fast  going  to  decay  and  no  improvements  are 
being  made.  An  end  has  apparently  come  to  making  new 
farms  in  the  wooded  region  in  the  northern  part  of  the 
state. 

Some  writers  for  the  New  York  City  press  represent 
the  condition  of  the  farmers  of  the  state  as  much  worse 
than  that  given  above.  They  declare  that  there  are  entire 
farming  towns  that  woulc  not  sell  for  enough  to  pay  their 
indebtedness ;  one  of  them  says : 

"Only  a  few  of  the  farms  of  this  state  appeal'  to  be 
fairly  prosperous.  Among  them  are  those  who  are  able 
to  work  their  places  without  the  aid  of  hired  help,  and 
those  who  have  some  money  invested  in  manufacturing 
interests,  saved  when  farm  products  commanded  a  better 
price.  As  a  business  in  which  it  is  profitable  to  invest 
capital  and  employ  a  large  iiumaber  of  men,  farming  in 
the  Empire  state  has  disappeared.  The  depression  in 
agriculture  is  as  great  in  New  York  as  in  any  state  in  the 
Union,  though  there  are  hundreds  of  factory  towns,  and 
people,  or  " home  market"  enough  to  consume  twice  as 
much  food  as  is  produced.  Apparently,  the  farmers  of 
New  York  are  being  ruined  by  the  protection  given  people 
engaged  in  other  industries." 

And  what  is  the  state  of  the  fanners  of  New  England, 
the  different  states  of  which  are  bristling  with  manufac- 
turing establishments,  where  nearly  every  farm  is  within 
hauling  distance  of  some  great  cotton  or  woolen  mill,  and 
where  the  "  home  market  "ought  to  be  profitable  i 
anywhere? 


94  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

The  Springfield  IZejmbUcan,  of  Massachusetts,  one  of 
the  best  informed  and  most  reliable  newspapers  of  the 
country,  in  a  recent  article  on  the  effect  of  protection 
upon  the  farmers  of  New  England,  says  : 

"  Agriculture,  as  a  fairly  profitable  industry,  has  come 
to  be  practically  unknown  in  a  great  many  sections  of  New 
England.  The  business  flourished  in  18G0,  reached  its 
culmination  at  the  close  of  the  war,  and  has  been  running 
down  hill  ever  since.  Perhaps  a  majority  of  farmers  are 
gaining  little  more  than  a  plain  livelihood,,  Farming  prop- 
erty generally  has  been  greatly  depreciated,  and  deserted 
or  mortgaged  farms,  especially  in  the  hill  towns,  are  get- 
ting to  be  the  rule  rather  than  the  exceptiou.  And  not 
even  the  richer  river  valleys  have  escaped  the  blight. 
From  no  section  of  New  England  comes  a  louder  and  better 
substantiated  complaint  of  long  hours  and  profitless  labor 
than  from  the  farmers  within  easy  access  of  Springfield. 
What  is  the  matter?  Chiefly  burdensome  taxation 
imposed  by  a  high  protective  tariff,  and  inability  to  com- 
pete with  Western  products  brought  into  our  market  by 
low  through-freight  rates,  .  .  .  Our  farmers  once 
kept  considerable  flocks  of  sheep  for  the  wool,  but  the 
government  put  a  high  tariff  on  this  product  and  the  flocks 
at  once  disappeared  to  the  Western  prairies  and  ranch 
lands,  free  of  cost  price  and  free  of  taxation,  where  syn- 
dicates monopolized  the  industry. 

We  have  then,  as  a  result,  for  New  England,  farms 
already  nearly  profitless  and  rapidly  declining.  In  the 
fairest  sections  of  Yermont,  in  towns  like  Ludlow,  where 
manufacturing  villages  afforded  a  possible  market  for  farm 
products  from  a  rich  river  valley,  agricultural  property  has 
depreciated  fifty  per  cent  since  1860.  In  that  same 
town    of   Ludlow  are  at  Dresent  twelve  deserted  farms. 


THE    EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   ON    FARMERS.  95 

and  one  of  the  petitions  to  the  last  legislature  was  that 
anybody  who  would  occupy  these  farms  might  be  exempted 
from  taxation  for  a  term  of  years.  If  the  town  of  Lud- 
low suffers  to  such  an  extent,  what  must  be  the  state  of 
agriculture  in  the  back  towns  of  that  state?  Census 
reports  for  the  last  four  decades  show  that  agricultural 
wealth  in  that  state  since  the  war  has  been  declining 
rapidly.  So  it  is  in  all  the  New  England  States,  save, 
perhaps,  Rhode  Island. " 

This,  thanks  to  the  protective  system,  is  to-day  the  sad 
condition  of  an  industry  to  which  its  stump  orators  "point 
with  pride "  as  the  foundation  and  main  pillar  of  our 
national  edifice. 

Before  and  during  the  war,  these  farmers  were  among 
the  most  prosperous  people  in  the  country,  and  such  en- 
cumbrances as  mortgages  upon  their  lands  were  hardly 
known.  During  and  some  years  after  the  war,  when 
money  circulated  freely,  they  realized  good  prices  for  their 
products.  The  government  was  in  need  of  large  sums  of 
money,  and,  with  other  patriotic  citizens,  the  farmers 
willingly  submitted  to  the  most  exorbitant  rates  of  direct 
and  indirect  taxation,  not  questioning  the  reasonableness 
of  the  amounts  nor  the  methods  of  raising  them.  It  never 
occurred  to  them  that  they  were  being  saddled  with  a 
system  of  Federal  taxation  by  which  they  were  being  made 
the  main  contributors  to  the  accumulation  of  immense 
private  fortunes.  But  there  came  a  time  when  mony  did 
not  continue  to  be  so  abundant,  and  prices  in  farming  prod- 
ucts began  to  decline.  Hard  times  came ;  nothing  pro- 
tected the  farmer  against  low  prices  in  the  world's  market ; 
against  the  uncertainties  and  inclemency  of  the  weather, 
poor  crops,  etc.  To  the  contrary,  his  burdens  were  in 
creased  by  the  government;   the  iron  grip   the  manu- 


90  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

facturer  had  fastened  upon  him  during  the  war,  and  under 
the  pretext  of  government  necessities,  was  rather  tightened 
than  relaxed.  The  armies  of  the  Union  had  been  dis- 
banded ;  the  taxes  on  such  luxuries  as  whisky  and  tobacco 
reduced  one  half;  the  bankers  were  relieved  of  stamp 
taxes.  In  fact  almost  all  internal  revenue  taxes  were 
wiped  out,  and  the  income  taxes,  obnoxious  to  the  rich 
only,  were  removed.  But  the  taxes  upon  the  daily  wants 
of  the  farmer  were  steadily  maintained.  This  process  of 
receiving  little  and  paying  out  much,  carried  on  for 
twenty  years,  could  not  logically  end  but  as  it  has,  in 
disaster  to  every  agricultural  interest. 


EFFECT  OF  PROTECTION  OK  THE  WAGES  OF 

LABOR. 


OF  all  the  various  questions  entering  into  this  tariff 
controversy  the  question  of  the  Avages  of  labor  is 
undoubtedly  the  most  important.  There  is  no  better  evi- 
dence of  the  general  prosperity  of  a  country  than  the  fact 
that  there  is  work  at  remunerative  wages  for  every  per- 
son desiring  work.  If  it  were  true  that  a  tariff  on  im- 
ports could  be  so  constituted  as  to  secure  to  the  working- 
men  of  this  country  steady  work  at  living  wages,  there 
would  be  little  opposition  among  the  people  to  the  exist- 
ing high  tariff. 

Protection  was  not  always  demanded  in  the  interest 
of  American  labor.  At  the  beginning  it  was  asked  to 
make  America,  industrially,  independent  of  Europe. 
The  next  pretense  was  to  shield  the  dearer  capital  of  the 
United  States  invested  in  manufacture  against  the  cheap 
capital  of  Europe.  Industrial  independence  having  since 
been  fully  secured,  and  the  plea  of  cheap  European  cap- 
ital being  too  plainly  in  the  interest  of  the  manufacturer, 
these  pretenses  were  abandoned  and  that  of  "protection 
for  American  labor  against  the  pauper  labor  of  Europe  " 
adopted. 

Of  all  the  devices  to  increase  the  profits  of  the  manu- 
facturer this  last  pretext  has  proved  the  most  effective,  as 
pretexts  always  will  prove  which  are  based  upon  the 
prejudices,  ignorance  and  stupidity  of  man.  If  it  were 
true  that  the  low  or  revenue  tariff  system  is  detrimental 
to  labor,  and  the  high  protective  system  is  beneficial, 

97 


98  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

then  these  relative  effects  must  necessarily  be  similar 
wherever  the  one  or  the  other  prevails,  or,  in  other  words, 
if  the  assertion  of  the  protectionist  is  correct,  wages 
ought  to  bo  low  in  low  tariff  countries  and  high  in  high 
tariff  countries. 

If  it  were  true  that  the  high  protective  system  has  the 
effect  of  increasing  the  wages  of  labor  in  the  United 
States,  where  work  is  more  abundant  and  competition 
among  laborers  less,  this  beneficent  effect  ought  to  be  still 
more  apparent  in  countries  where  work  is  comparatively 
scarce  and  labor  abundant.  Consequently,  the  wages 
paid  to  labor  in  Germany,  France,  Italy  and  Spain,  where 
high  protective  tariffs  prevail,  should  be  higher  than  in 
England,  where  every  protective  feature  is  eliminated 
from  the  tariff,  and  in  China,  where  foreign  imports  are 
almost  wholly  prohibited,  the  wages  of  labor  ought  to  be 
highest.  The  singularity  of  the  very  contrary  effect,  how- 
ever, must  be  apparent  to  the  most  obtuse  "protection- 
ist's" mind. 

Thus  it  appears  that  in  China,  where  the  "  home  indus- 
tries" are  protected  by  a  high  stone  wall  against  the 
"pauper  labor"  from  all  other  countries,  the  wages  of 
labor  is  so  low  that  the  monthly  earnings  of  a  Chinese 
laborer  would  hardly  cover  the  expenses  of  one  square 
meal  for  one  of  our  Pennsylvania  protectionists.  In 
Germany,  with  a  higher  tariff  than  France,  the  average 
standard  of  wages  is  below  that  of  the  latter  country  and 
not  so  high  as  in  Belgium,  where  a  tariff  for  revenue  only 
is  laid,  and  only  about  one-half  as  high  as  that  of  free- 
trade  England.  In  Italy  and  Spain,  with  almost  prohib- 
itory tariffs,  wages  are  lower  than  in  Germany. 

The  following  table  of  wages  paid  weekly  in  the  dif- 
ferent European  countries  is  to  be  found  on  page  2388, 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    THE    WAGES    OF    LABOR. 


99 


vol.  II,  of  the  report  of  the  United  States  Tariff  Com- 
mission : 


Occupations. 

G  ERMANY. 

Protection. 

France. 

Protection. 

IiELGrUM. 

Free  Trade. 

England. 
Free  Trade. 

Bricklayers 

$3.45 
4.00 
4.18 
4.60 
4.35 
3.90 
4.95 
3.30 
3.00 
4.87 
2.60 

$4.00 
5.00 
5.42 
4.90 

$6.00 
6.00 
5.40 
4.20 
5.40 
4.40 
4.80 

3.00 

$  8.12 
8.16 

Masons 

Carpenters 

8.25 

Painters 

7.25 

Plasterers    

8.10 

Blacksmiths 

8.12 

Cabinetmakers 

Dyers 

7.70 
7.00 

Grinders  in  glasswork. 

5.40 

10.92 

5.00 

The  industrial  history  of  England  furnishes  the  most 
conspicuous  example  in  proof  that  the  protective  policy  is 
rather  injurious  than  beneficial  to  labor. 

Fifty  years  ago,  under  the  restrictive  system,  her  work- 
ers did  not  receive  two-thirds  the  wages  of  what  they  are 
receiving  to-day.*  But  the  most  striking  feature  in  this  rise 
of  wages  is  the  fact,  that  the  wages  of  labor  employed  in  the 

*g1omparison  of  wages  in  great  britain  flfty  years  ago  and 
at  Present  Time. 

[From  "Miscellaneous  Statistics  of  the  United  Kingdom,"  and  Porter's  "  Prog- 
ress of  the  Nation."] 


Occupation. 

Place. 

Wages 
FiftyYrs. 

Ago. 
per  week. 

Wages 

Present 

Time. 

per  week. 

Increase. 
Amount. 
Per  Cent. 

Carpenters 

Bricklayers 

Huddersfield. . 
Bradford 

14s 

15s 

14s 

16s 

12s 

17s 
6s 

88  3d 
7.s  9d 
4.s  5d 

26s 

27.x 

23s  8d 
25s 
26s 
27s 
lis 

208  6d 
158  6d 
lls6<' 

12s  (plus)  85 
12s  (plus)  80 
98  8d  (plus)  69 
93  (plus)  55 
14s  (plus)  115 
iOs  (plus)  58 
58  (plus)  S3 
12s  3d  (plus)  150 

Pattern  weavers 

Warpers  and  beamers 

Reeling  and  warping 

78  9d  (plus)  100 
7s  Id  (plus)  160 

See  foot  of  Page  31. 


100 


THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 


cotton  and  woolen  industries  has  much  more  than  doub- 
led during  the  last  fifty  years.  The  export  value  of  the 
cotton  and  woolen  products  amounted  to  the  enormous 
sum  of  $534,000,000,  which  plainly  shows  that  labor  must 
look  for  steady  work  and  higher  wages  to  an  extended 
instead  of  a  restricted  market. 

Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  English  manufact- 
urers pay  double  the  wages  of  their  German  competitors, 
and  in  the  face  of  the  high  duty  put  upon  their  products 
by  the  German  government,  English  goods  are  sold  in 
Germany  in  competition  with  her  own  low-wage  goods, 
and  we  have  not  heard  of  any  English  manufacturer 
asking  to  be  protected  against  the  "pauper  labor"  of 
Germany?  And  why?  First,  because  Germany  has  not 
kept  pace  with  England  in  industrial  progress  and  because 
of  the  established  fact  that  a  high  rate  of  wages  insures 
higher  efficiency  in  labor,  f 

Comparison  of  Seamen's  Money  Wages  in  Great  Britain  per 
Month  at  1850  and  the  Present  Time. 

[From  the  "  Progress  of  Merchant  Shipping  Return."] 


Bristol  

Glasgow 

Liverpool  d) 

(2) 

London ....".. 


1850, 
Sailing. 


458 

45s 


50s 
45s 


Present 
Time, 

Steam. 


75s 
70s 

67s  6d 
858 
75s 


Increase. 


Amount.     Per  Cent, 


30s 
25s 
16s  M 
35s 


+  The  rate  of  wages  will  always  be  found  to  be  the  productiveness  of  the 
wage-earner.  It  must  always  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  great  law  of  average 
governs  this  as  well  as  every  other  problem  in  this  world.  No  two  workmen, 
even  working  side  by  side,  will  receive  precisely  the  same  wages  in  proportion 
to  the  amount  of  their  respective  productions.  Their  wages  may  be  exactly  the 
same,  but  their  production  will  differ  more  or  less.    So,  when  two  men  work 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   ON   THE    WAGES    OF    LABOR.      101 

On  the  other  hand,  American  wheat  and  pork  pro- 
duced by  unprotected  labor  are  sp]d;  at  a  profit  4 a  'France 
and  Germany  against  all  other- countries;  although  these 
countries  have  laid  discriminating  duties  upon thp&e  pro- 
ducts. 

In  the  United  States  the  standard  of  wages  has 
always  been  higher  than  in  Europe,  under  both  high 
and  low  tariffs,  or  without  any  tariff,  as  was  acknowl- 
edged by  Mr.  Hamilton  himself  in  his  famous  report 
on  manufactures,  long  before  the  laying  of  any  tariff. 
The  causes  are  entirely  disconnected  with  the  tariff 
and  absolutely  exceptional.  In  the  first  place,  the  very 
newness  and  vastness  of  our  domain,  the  daily  open- 
ing of  new  fields  of  agriculture  and  of  new  mines,  the 
building  of  new  railroads,  of  canals  and  other  waterways, 
the  laying  out  of  new  towns  and  cities,  but  principally 
our  free  institutions,  produce  conditions  favorable  to  labor 
not  prevailing  in  any  other  country  on  the  globe,  Austra- 
lia, also  a  new  country,  perhaps  excepted.  It  necessarily 
follows  that  labor  is  here  in  greater  demand  than  else- 
where, and  more  especially  in  unprotected  industries,  such 
as  agricultural  and  domestic  help,  labor  in  the  building 
trade,  in  transportation,  etc.,  etc.,  where  the  demand  is 
generally  in  excess  of  the  supply.  Consequently,  the 
wages  must,  in  the  average,  be  higher  than  in  other  coun- 
tries where  no  such  exceptional  conditions  prevail. 

In   the   second  place,   these    higher    wages  are  not 

side  by  side,  one  receiving  two  dollars  a  day  and  the  other  three  dollars,  the 
amount  produced  by  the  latter  will  not  necessarily,  or  even  probably,  exceed 
the  amount  produced  by  the  former  by  the  exact  difference  in  their  wages,  or 
in  the  exact  proportion.  But  if  we  could  ascertain  the  exact  productive  value 
of  100,000  laborers  at  two  dollars  a  day  each,  and  of  another  100,000  at  three  dol- 
lars a  day  each,  we  should  most  certainly  find  that  the  productive  value  of  the 
higher-paid  class  exceed  that  of  lower-paid  class  by  more  t  han  titty  per  cent. 

Thomas  A.  Shearman. 


102  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

secured  or  maintained  (most  particularly  in  protected 
industries)  by  the  voh-ntary  action  of  the  protected  bosses, 
but  through  the  compulsory  agencies  of  organized  labor. 
"With  Va2  vxii-i^Aon  of  our 'agriculturists  and  common 
laborers,  there  is  hardly  a  branch  of  industry  or  trade  in 
the  United  States  the  laborers  of  which  are  not  organ- 
ized, and  it  is  to  these  organizations,  and  not  to  the  gov- 
ernment, that  the  American  working-men  are  looking, 
and  are  compelled  to  look,  for  protection. 

Mr.  Powderly,  the  head  of  the  organization  of  the 
Knights  of  Labor,  in  a  paper  explaining  the  reasons  for 
founding  this  order,  says : 

"  The  principal  object  of  the  trades-unions  was  to  reg- 
ulate the  rate  of  wages." 

"  The  fierce  competition,"  exclaim  the  Commissioners 
of  the  Illinois  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  in  their  report 
for  1886,  "begotten  of  a  desire  for  great  and  sudden 
riches,  has  in  later  years  driven  multitudes  of  men  into 
organizations,  who  began  life  with  the  belief  that  their 
individual  effort  was  guarantee  enough  for  their  indus- 
trial freedom  and  prosperity." 

In  another  part  of  the  same  report  the  commissioners 
continue : 

"  Under  primitive  conditions  men  only  have  what  they 
can  get  and  hold  by  force ;  so  labor  has  fought  for  all  it 
has  and  retained  it  only  as  long  as  the  struggle  was  in 
its  favor.  By  this  sort  of  experience  the  e  organizations 
have  come  to  look  upon  force  as  the  only  agency  through 
which  to  hope  for  any  recognition.  If  the  time  shall 
ever  come  when  another  principle  shall  be  recognized, 
and  might  shall  no  longer  he  constituted  right,  no  doubt  all 
organizations  will  alike  cheerfully  lay  off  their  armor 
and  devote  their  energies  to  higher  and  worthier  objects." 


EFFECT  OF  PROTECTION  ON  THE  WAGES  OF  LABOR.   1(33 

But  skilled  labor,  which  thus  protects  itself,  also  im- 
plies superior  intelligence  and  ingenuity.  A  skilled  iron- 
worker, for  instance,  thrown  out  of  employment  in  his 
particular  branch  of  manufacture,  will  readily  adapt  him- 
self to  almost  any  kind  of  work  in  the  iron  trade.  Skilled 
labor  in  manufacture  has  this  additional  advantage  over 
the  unskilled,  that  it  is  necessarily  limited  in  quantity, 
owing  to  the  continual  expansion  of  manufacture,  and  will 
alwaj^s  remain  limited.  Skilled  labor  in  factories  is,  there- 
fore, especially  interested  in  not  having  the  market  for  its 
product  restricted,  but  in  having  it  as  much  as  possible 
enlarged  and  increased.  A  largely  increased  demand  of 
products  from  anywhere  necessarily  enhances  the  value  of 
skilled  labor  and,  consequently,  its  remuneration,  and  any 
law  restricting  the  sale  of  its  products,  at  home  or  abroad, 
is  a  law  for  the  depreciation  of  the  value  of  skilled  labor 
and  the  consequent  lowering  of  its  wages. 

The  rate  of  wages  of  unskilled  labor,  which  is  beyond 
the  control  of  labor  unions,  and  is  entirely  subjected  to 
the  law  of  supply  and  demand,  generally  is  about  the 
same  in  any  one  section  of  the  country,  but  varies 
greatly  between  the  sections.  The  standard  of  these 
wages  in  some  localities  and  for  certain  periods  is  much 
higher  than  in  others ;  in  New  York,  for  instance,  it  is  lower 
than  in  Chicago,  or  lower  in  Massachusetts  than  in  Iowa, 
or  vice  versa,  a  circumstance  which  plainly  shows  that 
labor  is  not  affected  by  the  tariff  on  imports,  but  is  sub- 
ject to  the  law  of  supply  and  demand.  At  one  time  ]STew 
York  may  be  overflowing  with  unskilled  labor,  while  Illi- 
nois is  in  want  of  it ;  but  the  process  of  equalization  is 
slow  and  often  difficult,  and,  while  in  the  former  State 
plenty  of  labor  can  be  had  at  $1  per  day,  it  may  be  scarce 
in  Illinois  at  $1.50.     The  great  bulk  of  unskilled  labor  in 


104  'fHE    PROTETCIVE   'TARIFF. 

the  different  sections  of  the  country  is  employed  upon  the 
farms,  or  in  the  construction  of  railroads  and  in  transpor- 
tation, and  it  may  be  said  that  the  average  wages  paid  in 
these  branches  of  industry  is  about  the  standard  of  wages 
paid  to  unskilled  labor  in  all  other  occupations  in  their 
respective  sections  of  country.  It  cannot  be  otherwise, 
because  labor,  like  water,  seeks  its  level.* 

Owing  to  its  superior  effectiveness,  skilled  labor  in  the 
cotton,  woolen  and  silk  factories  in  the  United  States 
practically  earns  higher  wages  than  similar  labor  in  Eu- 
rope. It  has  been  ascertained  that  in  our  cotton  mills, 
for  instance,  the  operatives  produce  one-third  more  cotton 
goods  per  day,  in  the  average,  than  the  operatives  in 
English  factories,  and  almost  four  times  as  much  as  the 
factory  hands  in  Germany.  The  wages  of  skilled  labor 
in  factories  also  varies  more  or  less,  according  to  circum- 
stances, which  showrs  that,  outside  of  the  causes  given 
above,  calculations  or  generalizations  upon  this  or  that 
theory  are  unsatisfactory  and  not  conclusive. 

The  absurdity  of  the  claim  that  protection  has  the 
effect  of  enhancing  and  of  regulating  the  rate  of  wages 
is  admirably  illustrated  by  the  following  table,  computed 
by  Mr.  Nordhof  from  the  last  census  report,  showing  the 
yearly  earnings  of  the  cotton  and  woolen  operatives  in  the 
different  sections  of  the  country.  In  woolen  mills  the 
average  yearly  earnings  are  as  follows : 

*The  difference  in  wages  in  the  same  industries  in  different  sections  of  the 
United  States  is  well  illustrated  in  the  following  returns  of  wages  in  the  iron 
industries  of  different  States,  made  under  the  census  of  1880 :  Unskilled  labor 
in  blast  furnaces  in  Virginia,  eighty-two  cents  per  day;  in  Alabama,  ninety- 
eight  cents ;  in  Pennsylvania,  $1.09,  and  in  Missouri,  $1.29.  Skilled  labor  in  iron 
rolling-mills  in  Alabama,  $2.25  per  day;  in  Massachusetts,  $2.70;  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, $3.03;  in  Ohio,  $3.87,  and  in  Kentucky,  $4.02.  The  yearly  average  wages 
in  the  aggregate  iron  industries  of  the  diffei-ent  sections  of  the  United  States  is 
reported  as  follows :  Eastern  States,  $417;  Western,  $396;  Pacific,  $354;  South- 
ern, $304.  David  A.  Wells. 


EFFECT  OF  PROTECTION  ON  THE  WAGES  OF  LABOR.   105 

Connecticut $335  New  York $285 

Maine 320  New  Hampshire 280 

Pennsylvania 300  Vermont 270 

New  Jersey 300  Indiana 230 

Massachusetts 320  Ohio 196 

In  cotton  industries  they  are  as  follows  : 

New  Hampshire $255  South  Carolina $190 

Massachusetts 251  Maryland 188 

Rhode  Island 250  Georgia 180 

Pennsylvania 250  Tennessee 160 

Ohio 250  Alabama 160 

Connecticut 242  Virginia 150 

New  York 281  North  Carolina 135 

Why  is  it  that  the  operatives  in  the  cotton-mills  of 
Maine,  New  Hampshire  and  New  Jersey  earn  upon  an 
average  $255  a  year,  while  those  in  the  great  and  flour- 
ishing State  of  New  York  receive  only  $218,  those  in  Vir- 
ginia $150,  and  those  in  North  Carolina  must  content 
themselves  with  the  "pauper  wages"  of  $135  a  year? 
Why  is  it  that  the  woolen-mills  of  Connecticut  pay  their 
operatives  $335  a  year  on  an  average,  while  those  in 
"  wool-producing"  Ohio  pay  theirs  but  $19G?  We  don't 
know  that  there  is  any  more  protection  for  cotton  goods 
manufactured  in  Virginia  and  the  Carolinas  than  for 
those  manufactured  in  Maine,  Connecticut  and  New  Jer- 
sey, nor  is  it  clear  why  the  workmen  in  the  woolen-mills 
of  the  State  of  Ohio,  where  both  raw  wool  and  the  manu- 
factured fabric  are  highly  protected  against  the  "  pauper 
product "  of  Europe,  should  earn  a  little  more  than  half 
the  wages  of  their  fellow  operatives  in  the  wooden-nut- 
meg State. 

Thus  do  these  census  figures  furnish  undisputed  proof 
that  the  tariff  upon  imported  goods  has  nothing  whatever 
to  do  with  the  rate  of  wages,  but  that  it  is  dependent  alto- 
gether upon  other  causes,  the  chief  of  which  is  "  the  law 
of  supply  and  demand  "  and  the  greater  or  less  effective- 
ness for  organized  labor. 


10G  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

This  inequality  of  wages  in  the  different  sections  of 
the  country  may  also  be  only  apparently  so.  It  may  be 
that  if  rent  and  household  expenses  necessary  to  support 
his  family  are  considered,  a  man  earning  $280  in  New 
Hampshire  can  live  as  comfortably  as  the  other  who 
earns  $335  in  Connecticut,  and  the  man  who  earns  $218 
in  New  York  may  not  live  so  well  as  the  other  who 
earns  but  $160  in  Tennessee.  But  the  main  cause  of  this 
inequality  is  probably  to  be  found  in  the  circumstance 
that  the  labor  of  these  low-wage  factories  is  chiefly  com- 
posed of  females  and  children.  This  helpless  class  is 
more  easily  imposed  upon,  cannot  migrate  and  has  less 
power  of  resistance  than  men.* 

Again,  an  important  factor  which  is  generally  ignored 
in  the  discussion  of  the  question  of  labor  is  that  of 
changing  occupations. 

This  shifting  of  labor  from  one  occupation  to  another 
is  peculiarly  American.  It  is  a  Avell-established  fact  that 
no  people  adapt  themselves  so  readily  to  a  change  in  the 
pursuits  of  life  as  the  Americans.  This  circumstance  is 
probably  attributable  to  her  free  institutions,  which  are 
unexceptionably  favorable  to  the  development  of  individ- 

*In  our  cotton-mills,  especially,  the  women  and  children  largely  exceed  the 
men,  being  often  from  two-thirds  to  five-sixths  of  the  whole,  and  the  propor- 
tion of  them  is  steadily  increasing.  And  what  are  these  women  and  children 
but  the  very  weakest  and  most  dependent  of  all  the  people  ?  They  have  no 
disposition  to  agitate.  They  have  no  power  to  change  any  existing  condition  of 
society  if  they  would,  and  their  minds  do  not  work  in  that  range,  if  they  could. 
All  that  is  possible  to  them  is  to  toil  and  scrimp  and  bear.  Now,  for  men,  the 
strong,  those  who  bear  rule,  the  sovereigns  of  the  land,  the  hours  of  labor  are 
but  ten  all  over  the  country,  in  about  every  employment  where  they  prepon- 
derate. But  where  the  women  and  children  preponderate,  the  hours  of  labor, 
as  a  rule,  are  eleven  or  more.  And  the  question  is,  why  is  it,  in  this  land,  which 
aims  for  equality  and  justice,  that  the  weakest,  the  most  helpless  and  depend- 
ent, are  loaded  with  the  burden  of  the  more  hours,  while  the  strong,  the  able 
to  bear  and  the  controlling,  only  have  the  less  hours  to  work  ?  And  this  question, 
which  an  operative  whispered  in  our  ear  in  a  private  room,  we  have  taken  the 
liberty  to  utter  aloud.  —  Report  of  Massachusetts  Labor  Bureau. 


EFFECT   01     PROTECTION    ON    THE    WAGES    OF    LABOR.      107 

ual  genius,  skill  and  enterprise.  It  may  be  said  that  of 
all  our  most  successful  business  men  who  have  reached 
the  age  of  fifty,  not  one  in  twenty  has  continually  fol- 
lowed the  trade  or  occupation  he  started  out  in  when 
young.  If  one  kind  of  business  or  occupation  does  not 
prove  remunerative,  the  American  will  not  lose  his  time 
and  money  waiting  for  better  times,  or,  Micawber-like, 
"  for  something  to  turn  up,"  but  will  immediately  cast 
about  for  something  that  will  pay,  continuing  to  do  so 
until  he  finds  the  occupation  that  is  satisfactorily  remu- 
nerative. Such  changes  often  cause  personal  inconvenience 
and  even  hardship.  But  this  trouble  is  only  temporary. 
It  is  this  very  display  of  individual  energy  and  self- 
reliance  which  has  given  to  the  American  world-wide 
renown. 

This  spirit  of  enterprise  and  independence  is  not  con- 
fined to  business  men  by  any  means,  but  is  found  among 
all  classes  and  occupations,  from  the  farmer  to  the  clerk 
in  the  counting-room,  from  the  mechanic  in  the  shop  to 
the  commercial  traveler  on  the  road,  and  it  is  this  char- 
acteristic trait  which  renders  the  shifting  of  labor  in  any 
trade  or  industry  from  one  occupation  to  another  com- 
paratively easy  in  this  country. 

Unskilled  labor  experiences  the  least  difficulty  in 
changing  occupations.  The  main  difficulty  lies  in  the 
expense  of  travel  from  one  section  of  the  country  to  the 
other.  If  this  obstacle  could  be  overcome  it  would  matter 
very  little  to  the  man  who  handles  the  shovel,  the  spade 
or  the  ax  whether  he  exerted  his  muscular  power  and 
dexterity  in  a  rolling-mill,  in  a  factoiy,  in  the  building 
trade,  in  digging  trenches  in  our  cities,  in  throwing  up 
railroad  embankments,  in  cutting  wood  and  making  hay 
upon  the  farm,  or  in  performing  any  other  manual  labor 


108  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

incident  to  the  various  interests  in  this  vast  and  busy 
country.  And  yet,  in  the  face  of  this  wonderful  quality 
of  adaptation,  we  are  constantly  told  by  our  protection- 
ists "  if  you  lower  or  remove  the  tariff  from  such  and 
such  commodities  thousands  of  operatives  will  be  thrown 
out  of  employment,"  conveying  the  inference  that  in  such 
event  there  is  an  end  to  all  employment,  and  these  unfort- 
unates will  be  thrown  upon  the  cold  world  to  beg  or  to 
starve,  or  be  compelled  to  go  to  farming ! 

Such  statements  are  made  by  interested  parties  before 
the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  of  the  American  House 
of  Representatives  under  oath,  and  upon  such  random 
statements  the  fiscal  legislation  of  the  country  is  car- 
ried on. 

A  case  in  point  is  that  of  Mr.  William  H.  Lee,  a  pig- 
iron  manufacturer  in  St.  Louis,  who  testified  in  1883 
before  the  United  States  Tariff  Commission  concerning 
the  effect  of  the  protective  system  upon  the  pig-iron 
industry.  One  of  his  statements  was  that  "the  doing 
away  with  the  tariff  on  pig-iron  would  put  five  hun- 
dred thousand  or  six  hundred  thousand  men  now  engaged 
in  the  manufacture  of  pig-iron  to  raising  corn  ;  would 
take  that  number  of  men  out  of  the  market  as  purchas- 
ers of  co?m,  with  the  fall  of  the  price  of  corn  as  the 
natural  result." 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  not  one-fourth  part  of  the 
number  stated  by  Mr.  Lee  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of 
pig-iron  and  iron-ore  mining  put  together.  From  the  last 
census  report  it  appears  that  159,529  persons  were  em- 
ployed in  the  manufacture  of  iron  and  steel,  33,286  in 
hardware  and  cutlery,  145,351  in  machinery  and  26,248  in 
tin,  copper  and  sheet-iron,  or  364,414  persons  in  all.  The 
whole  number  of  persons  employed  in  the  mining  of  iron- 


EFFECT  OF  PROTECTION  ON  THE  WAGES  OF  LABOR.   109 

ore  and  the  manufacture  of  pig-iron  is  probably  not  more 
than  160,000. 

But  what  of  the  other  two  hundred  thousand  men 
who  are  employed  in  the  various  branches  of  iron  and 
steel  manufacture  ?  Is  it  probable,  if  the  manufacturers 
of  machinery,  hardware  and  cutlery,  of  tin  and  sheet-iron, 
etc.,  etc.,  could  purchase  their  crude  material  forty -five 
per  cent  cheaper  than  they  do  now,  in  which  case  they 
might  advantageously  compete  with  foreign  manufact- 
urers, this  would  have  the  effect  of  throwing  their  oper- 
atives out  of  employment  ? 

But  let  us  suppose  the  most  improbable  thing  that 
could  happen,  to-wit :  that  the  placing  of  pig-iron  on  the 
free  list  would  throw  150,000  men  out  of  employment. 
Why  should  they  go  to  raising  corn  ?  Would  any 
manufacturer,  in  case  his  pig-iron  establishment  were  to 
be  shut  up,  invest  his  capital  in  the  unprofitable  business 
of  raising  corn?  Of  course  not.  If  he  found  that  the 
government  of  the  United  States  had  ceased  meddling 
with  the  iron  business,  or  had  stopped  lending  its  taxing 
powers  to  private  concerns,  he  would,  like  every  other  sensi- 
ble business  man,  content  himself  with  smaller  profits,  or,  if 
unable  to  stand  alone,  seize  upon  one  of  the  thousands  of 
favorable  opportunities  which  are  continually  open  to  the 
thrifty  and  industrious  in  this  vast  country,  and  invest  his 
capital  in  some  enterprise  that  did  not  need  any  other  aid 
than  his  own  energy  and  sound  judgment.  In  that  case, 
he  might,  perhaps,  give  to  some  of  those  150,000  men 
thrown  out  of  the  pig-iron  business  more  permanent  and 
remunerative  employment  than  they  had  before.  If  not, 
some  of  them,  if  they  felt  so  inclined,  might  go  into  rais- 
ing corn,  but  all  would  probably  show  as  much  good  sense 


110 


THE    PROTECTIVE    TAKTFF. 


as  their  former  employers,  and  go  to  work  where  plenty 
of  employment  at  living  wages  was  to  be  found. 

But  if  any  reliance  can  be  placed  in  the  figures  of  the 
United  States  Census  Report,  the  pecuniary  condition  of 
these  iron-workers  would  be  improved  rather  than  im- 
paired by  a  change  of  occupation.  From  this  report  it 
appears  that  the  earnings  of  the  toilers  in  this  branch  of 
our  piotected  industries  do  not  exceed  the  munificent  sum 
of  $b25  a  year  in  the  average.  Some  of  these,  in  their 
march  west  in  quest  of  a  patch  of  land  for  the  raising  of 
corn,  might  stop  half-way,  in  Illinois,  for  instance,  and  find 
work  in  some  industry  or  trade  which  never  asked  for 
protection,  nor  cared  to  be  protected,  and  get  better  pay 
and  more  permanent  work  than  they  had  in  the  iron  busi- 
ness ;  as,  for  instance,  in  any  one  of  these  enumerated  in 
the  following  list  of  unprotected  occupations,  as  found  in 
the  report  of  the  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics  of  the  State 
of  Blinois,  for  1885. 


AVERAGE  YEARLY  WAGES. 


Barbers $  5G6  22 

Baggagemen 540 

Blacksmiths ...  622  35 

Blacksmiths'  helpers  . .  470  86 

Brakemen... 508  60 

Bricklayers 637  60 

Brick  makers 416  80 

Bridge  builders 737  40 

Butchers 514  70 

Carpenters 552  44 

Clerks 640  83 

Coopers 432  18 

Draughtsmen 860  66 

Locomotive  engineers  .   1020  17 

Locomotive  firemen. . .  670 

Hod-carriers 346  66 


Laborers 

Lumber-shovers. . 

Millers 

Painters 

Paper  hangers  . . 

Plasterers 

Plumbers 

Printers 

Quarrymen 

Stonemasons 

Stonecutters   

Street-car  conductors. . 

Street-car  drivers 

Switchmen 

Telegraphers 

Teamsters 


$  344  no 

454  71 
872 

503  10 

601  50 

625  69 

581  14 

654  50 

400  CO 

467  21 

627  07 

698  40 

638  45 

622  66 
755 

459  97 


Thus,  it  would  appear  that  the  hod-carrier,  who  is 
constantly  exposed  to  the  competition  of  the  "pauper 
labor"  from  Europe,  earns  $21  more  than  the  iron-worker 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    THE    WAGES    OF    LABOR.      Ill 

whose  product  is  protected  fifty  per  cent  in  the  aver- 
age. The  common  laborer  in  Illinois  earns  $19  more,  the 
blacksmith  $297,  and  his  helper  $215  more,  the  street-car 
driver  earns  nearly  twice  as  much  and  the  ordinary  team- 
ster If  as  much  as  the  hard-working  pig-iron  man. 

This  scale  of  wages  in  the  various  unprotected  trades 
and  occupations  in  the  State  of  Illinois  does  not  materially 
differ  from  that  in  any  of  the  other  Western  States. 

But  neither  the  iron- worker  nor  any  of  the  workmen 
employed  in  our  manufacturing  industries  need  leave 
their  shops  and  go  to  farming,  or  change  their  occupation 
for  that  of  blacksmithing,  shaving  or  bricklaying.  All 
that  is  necessary  for  them  to  do  is  to  compel  their  repre- 
sentatives in  Congress  to  remove  the  onerous  taxes  on  the 
raw  material  of  the  American  manufacturer,  and  to  lower 
them  on  the  necessaries  of  fife.  In  that  case  our  manu- 
facturer will  be  enabled  to  compete  with  his  foreign  com- 
petitor, and  by  adapting  his  methods  to  the  wants  of  the 
foreign  consumer  will  secure  a  share  of  his  trade,  and, 
consequently,  additional  work  for  his  employes. 


EFFECT  OF  PROTECTION"  ON"  LABOR  TE 
PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES. 


PROTECTED  industries  are  industries  whose  prod- 
ucts are  protected  by  a  tariff  on  imports  against 
similar  products  of  foreign  manufacture. 

Whatever  may  be  the  pretext,  protection  is  demanded 
by  the  manufacturer  or  mine  owner  for  his  product 
against  the  cheaper  product  from  abroad.  Consequently, 
the  only  labor  which  can  possibly  receive  any  benelit 
from  that  system  is  the  labor  which  is  employed  on 
industries  the  products  of  which  are  exposed  to  foreign 
competition.  All  other  labor,  otherwise  employed,  is 
necessarily  excluded  from  these  supposed  benefits.  I 
say  "  supposed "  because  it  is  not  real,  the  benefits,  if 
there  are  any,  all  going  to  the  manufacturer. 

If  there  is  any  virtue  in  the  protective  system  for 
American  labor,  as  claimed,  it  ought,  logically,  to  be  most 
potent  where  it  is  most  applied,  and  if  the  effect  of  it  ren- 
ders the  condition  of  the  people  prosperous,  those  who 
are  working  in  and  are  drawing  their  wages  from  these 
industries,  as  a  matter  of  course,  ought  to  be  in  the  most 
prosperous  condition.  Now,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  pro- 
tection against  foreign-made  products  has  the  effect  of 
promoting  the  prosperity  of  the  comparatively  small 
number  of  hard-working  miners,  iron-workers,  spinners 
and  weavers  of  our  wool  and  cotton-mills,  the  protection- 
ists have,  at  least,  a  reasonable  foothold  for  their  claims. 

113 


LABOK    IN    PROTECTED    INDUSTRIES.  '       113 

What  is  the  naked  truth  about  this  matter?  What  is 
the  actual  condition  of  these  people  ? 

As  it  is  only  by  comparisons  that  we  can  reach  cor- 
rect conclusions  let  us  compare  notes  for  awhile. 

From  the  census  report  of  1880  it  appears  that  17,- 
392,099  persons  were  employed  in  gainful  occupations. 

Of  these  7,670,493  were  employed  in  agricultural  and 
personal  services,  1,810,256  in  trades  and  transportation 
and  3,837,112  in  manufacturing,  mechanical  and  mining. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  at  the  outset  that  of  the  total 
labor  employed  four-fifths  belong  to  the  unprotected 
class. 

Of  the  class  enumerated  "manufacturing,  mechanical 
and  mining"  only  about  fifteen  hundred  thousand  are 
employed  in  what  are  known  as  protected  industries. 

According  to  the  same  report,  the  total  value  of  the 
manufactured  products  in  1860  amounted  to  $1,885,861,- 
676.  The  wages  paid  in  the  manufacture  of  these  goods 
was  $378,878,966,  and  the  cost  of  material  $1,031,605,- 
092.  Deducting  the  amount  of  the  wages  and  the  cost 
of  material  from  the  total  value  of  the  products,  there 
remains  $475,377,618. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  workmen  were  not 
then  "  protected" ;  still  their  share  in  the  value  of  the 
product  amounted  to  twenty  per  cent.  In  1880,  when  all 
consumers  of  manufactured  goods  were  taxed  from  forty 
to  fifty  per  cent  for  the  special  benefit  of  the  "poor 
laborer,"  these  laborers'  share  in  the  total  product  was 
only  about  seventeen  per  cent,  or  less  than  when  we  had 
not  over  half  the  population,  not  the  fifth  part  of  the 
railroads,  and  only  140,433  manufacturing  establishments 
against  253,840  in  1880. 

From  the   above  figures  it  is  evident  that  the  manu- 


114  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

facturers,  who  during  certain  periods  have  realized  enor- 
mous profits  from  the  effect  of  protection,  have  never 
offered  to  share  a  portion  of  these  profits  with  their  opera- 
tives; and  no  rational  man  would  suppose  that  they 
should.  They  do  not  engage  in  manufacturing  or  mining 
upon  the  ground  of  philanthropy,  but  for  the  purpose  of 
making  money. 

It  would  be  childish  to  expect  them  to  pay  higher 
wages  to  their  men  than  what  labor  can  be  had  for,  sim- 
ply because  they  are  doing  a  profitable  business,  and  it  is 
only  a  pretense  that  it  is  for  this  purpose  the  manufact- 
urers ask  for  governmental  protection. 

It  is  true  that  since  1860  wages  in  factories  have 
slightly  increased,  but,  as  is  the  case  with  all  stimulants, 
the  effect  was  not  permanent. 

The  following  tabulated  statement,  compiled  by  Mr. 
Schoenhof,  from  the  census  reports  of  I860  and  1880, 
shows  what  the  increase  of  earnings  of  our  working-peo- 
ple was  in  the  most  highly  protected  industries  from  1860 
to  1880.. 

Per  cent 
1860.      1880.    increase. 

Woolen  and  worsted  goods $234  $300  28 

Iron  and  steel 355  390  10 

Cotton 200  246  23 

Machinery 390  450  15 

Glass 330  375  15 

Jewelry 435  500  15 

Saddlery  and  harness 350  380  9 

This  increase,  on  an  average,  was  sixteen  per  cent,  and 
this  great  feat  was  accomplished  in  twenty  years,  while 
the  products  of  the  manufacturer  were  protected  with 
forty-five  per  cent  duty  against  his  foreign  competitor. 
It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  even  this  small  increase  of 
Wages,  mostly  secured  during  war  times,  when  labor  was 


LABOU  KT  PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES. 


115 


less  abundant  and  competition  between  the  home  manu- 
facturers limited,  was  only  maintained  by  organized  labor, 
which  stoutly  resisted  every  reduction.  It  must  be  born 
in  mind  also  that  these  efforts  notwithstanding',  the  aver- 
age wages  in  protected  industries  have  steadily  declined 
since  1880. 

The  proof  to  this  statement  has  not  only  been  fur- 
nished by  the  daily  press  for  the  last  seven  or  eight  years, 
but  it  may  be  found  in  the  official  reports  of  the  Bureaus 
of  Labor  Statistics,  which  of  late  years  have  been  estab- 
lished in  several  of  the  States. 

The  last  annual  report  of  the  statistical  bureau  of  the 
State  of  Illinois  contains  the  summary  of  a  carefully  pre- 
pared table  of  the  rise  and  fall  of  wages  in  114  occupa- 
tions during  the  five  years  from  1881  to  1886,  inclusive. 
Of  these  the  following  list  of  twelve  protected  and  twelve 
unprotected  occupations  are  given  :  * 

PROTECTED    OCCUPATIONS. 


Brushmakers 

Cloak-factory  workers. 

Coal-miners 

Confectioners 

Iron  and  steel  workers. 

Iron-niolders 

Organ-builders 

Paper-mill  operatives. . 

Salt  laborers 

Shoemakers 

Tinners 

Zinc  factory  men 


Weekly  Wages. 


1880. 


$12  00 

14  75 
12  02 
18  80 
41  10 
16  43 

15  00 

12  00 

13  20 
12  30 
12  90 
25  00 


1886.      ,Per  cent 
decrease. 


$10  80 

11  75 

8  02 

12  14 
36  50 
14  41 
12  00 

10  05 
12  00 

9  90 

11  25 
18  75 


5 
20 
33 
35 
11 
12 
20 
16 

9 

19 
12 
25 


*  The  average  rate  of  wages  of  watch-factory  workers  at  Elgin,  as  reported, 
was  812.00  a  week  in  1882  and  only  $9.00  in  1886. 

Similar  workers  employed  in  the  watch-factory  at  Rockford  received  $16.0t' 
pf>r  week  in  wages  in  1882 and  but  $12.00  in  1880. 

The  tariff  on  watches  is  twenty-five  per  cent. 


116 


THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 


UNPROTECTED    OCCUPATIONS. 


Bricklayers  and  Stonemasons 

Electrotypers 

Hod-carriers 

Slate-roofers 

Press-feeders 

Stair-builders 

Steam-fitter  helpers 

Stone-block  pavers 

Stone-cutters 

Street-railway  employes  .... 

Wooden-block  pavers 

Wood-turners 


Weekly  Wages. 


1880. 


$19  05 

13  50 
9  00 

14  25 
7  00 

13  50 
9  00 
18  00 
18  00 
10  25 
18  00 
12  00 


1880. 


$20  10 
19  15 

11  50 
15  75 

8  50 
15  75 

12  00 
24  00 
21  60 

13  01 
23  50 

14  25 


Per  cent 
increase. 


14 
44 
27 
10 
21 
17 
33 
33 
20 
27 
30 
19 


Thus  it  appears  that  the  wages  in  the  twelve  pro- 
tected industries  suffered  a  decrease  of  eighteen  per 
cent  on  an  average  during  those  five  years,  while  flic 
wages  in  the  twelve  unprotected  industries  received  an 
average  increase  of  twenty-one  per  cent.  And  again. 
Mr.  Arrott,  of  Philadelphia,  who  was  selected  to  collect 
statistics  for  the  United  States  census  of  1880,  says : 
"While  wages  earned  in  protected  industries  in  1870 
was,  per  hand  employed,  $446,  for  the  year  1880  it  was 
but  $313.75,  or  a  decrease  of  about  twenty-nine  per  cent.*' 

And  again:  Mr.  Wright,  in  his  annual  report  of  1883, 
states  that  in  1875,  the  percentage  of  wages  paid  to  the 
value  of  production  in  over  two  thousand  establishments 
was  24.68,  and  that  in  1880  it  was  only  20.23,  a  decrease 
erf  one-sixth  in  five  years. 

Now,  it  must  be  remembered  that  during  all  this  time 
the  high  protective  tariff  of  1867,  with  very  slight  modi- 
fication, was  in  operation,  and  that  every  attempt  at  its 
reduction  was  met  by  the  manufacturers  with  the  claim 


LABOK  IN.  PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES.  117 

"  that  such  a  reduction  would  be  ruinous  to  American 
labor."  Is  it  not  plain  that  the  benefits  of  protection,  if 
there  are  any,  have  not  gone  to  labor,  which,  with  the  aid 
of  organization  even,  has  not  succeeded  in  maintaining 
the  former  standard  of  wages,  but  that  the  benefits  must 
have  gone  to  the  manufacturer  ? 

Let  us  see  what  men  of  experience  in  the  business 
have  to  say  about  this  matter. 

Mr.  Carroll  D.  "Wright,  present  Chief  of  the  United 
States  Labor  Statistics  Bureau,  when  chief  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts Labor  Bureau,  testified  before  the  United  States 
Senate  Committee  in  relation  to  wages  and  its  propor- 
tionate share  in  the  profits  as  follows  : 

Being  asked  to  state  his  ideas  in  regard  to  the  equit- 
able distribution  of  the  joint  product  of  capital  and  labor 
as  it  exists  at  the  present  time  in  that  state,  Mr.  Wright 
said  : 

"  Take  $100  worth  of  product  at  the  price  the  manufacturer  sells  it 
at  his  warehouse;  61.32  is  raw  material,  20.33  is  labor  and  12.88  is 
interest  and  expense,  leaving  5.47  as  net  profit  to  capital." 

"  What  rate  would  that  be  on  the  investment?  " 

"Well,  according  to  my  report  (1883),  it  would  be  $34,000,000  in 
round  numbers,  on  $303,000,000  capital  invested,  which  would  be  about 
ten  per  cent  on  the  capital  invested  but  not  on  the  product." 

"  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  sum  remaining  to  be  distributed 
upon  the  capital  invested  in  the  State  of  Massachusetts,  after  paying 
interest  on  the  capital,  is  ten  per  cent  more?  " 

"  Ten  per  cent  more  on  the  capital." 

"What  is  the  value  of  the  product  of  a  single  mechanic?  " 

"The  average  to  each  employe  was  $1,792;  that  is  what  each 
mechanic,  man,  women  and  child,  produces.  Now,  to  each  man, 
woman  and  child  employed  in  a  mechanical  industry  the  employer  gets  $98 
net  profit;  that  is  giving  him  six  per  cent  on  his  capital  and  five  per 
cent  on  his  product,  etc.  Each  employe  gets  $364.  That  brings  $98  to 
the  employer  as  net  profit  on  the  product  of  each  employe.  It  is  the 
product  of  $364  yearly  wages  paid  to  each  enploye  that  produces  that 
$1,792.     The  balance  is  raw  material  and,  expense." 


118  THE   POTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

"  Suppose  there  were  but  one  employer  in  Massachusetts,  and  the 
present  number  of  employes,  how  much  would  that  employer  get?  " 

"He  would  get  a  net  profit  of  $34,505,367." 

"  What  would  the  laborers  receive?  " 

"  They  would  receive  $128,315,362,  divided  among  352,255  of  them 
or  $364  each." 

"  How  much  capital  would  one  employer  have  in  business,  then?' 

"He  would  have  $303,806,185." 

"  What  he  has  left  after  paying  all  expenses  is  $34,505,367?" 

"  Yes;  after  all  his  expenses  of  labor,  raw  material,  etc." 

' '  That  is  to  say  that  would  be  the  profit  after  the  payment  of 
interest  on  his  capital  invested  and  all  insurance  and  outgo  of  every 
description,  and  keeping  up  his  plant,  repairs  and  all  that?  " 

"Yes." 

On  page  653  of  the  United  States  Senate  Committee's 
report,  we  find  the  following  testimony  of  Mr.  Howard, 
of  Fall  River — a  former  member  of  the  State  Legislature 
and  Secretary  of  the  Spinners'  Association.  His  evidence 
was  in  reference  to  the  share  of  labor  in  the  manufactured 
product. 

Senator  Pugh. — "  You  are  a  man  of  intelligence  and  your  knowl- 
edge, being  founded  on  personal  observation  and  experience,  is,  there* 
fore,  very  valuable.  I  understand  you  to  state  from  your  personal 
observation  that  the  manufacturing  classes  in  the  New  England  States 
are  overworked?  " 

"  Yes  sir." 

"  I  want  to  get  your  knowledge  or  your  views  as  to  the  value  which 
the  labor  of  the  operative  imparts  to  the  articles  that  are  manufactured 
in  the  cotton  mills  at  Fall  River  where  you  work.  How  much  of  the 
value  does  the  labor  of  the  operative  impart  to  the  cotton  fabrics  made 
there?" 

"  I  think  it  is  twenty  or  twenty-two  per  cent,  but  I  am  not  certain." 

"What  is  your  knowledge  and  information  as  to  the  share  that  the 
laborer  gets  of  the  product,  when  a  division  is  made  between  him  and 
the  manufacturer  ?  What  is  your  idea,  also,  as  to  whether  that  share  is 
equitable,  just  and  right,  whether  it  is  such  a  share  of  the  product  as  the 
laborer  should  have  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  work  that  he  does, 
and  the  amount  of  value  that  his  labor  imparts  to  the  product?" 

"  There  is  a   wide    difference   between   towns   and    cities.    For 


LABOR  IN  PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES.  119 

instance,  here  are  the  Pacific  mills  in  Lawrence.  Last  year  they 
reduced  the  wages  of  their  help  to  about  twenty-five  per  cent,  and  we 
could  prove  that,  for  nineteen  years  preceding,  the  corporation  had 
declared  dividends,  averaging  twenty  and  a  half  per  cent.  We  could 
find  evidence  of  that  in  our  State  records." 

"  Are  you  telling  us  now  what  the  capitalists  —  the  manufacturers 
—  got  in  that  case?" 

"  Yes,  sir;  that  is  the  kind  of  dividends  they  get  in  good  times,  and 
then,  when  the  first  cloud  of  adversity  comes,  they  never  think  of  the 
large  dividends  they  have  been  making  for  years,  but  they  look  around 
and  say,  '  The  market  is  falling,  and  we  must  keep  up  these  dividends 
in  some  way ! '  and  then  they  try  to  do  it  by  cutting  down  the  wages  of 
their  workmen." 

"  That  is,  they  are  not  willing  to  lose  any  portion  of  these  twenty- 
per-cent  dividends  when  revulsions  come  in  trade  and  panics  take  place 
— they  are  not  willing  to  lose  anything  themselves,  but  they  make  labor 
bear  the  loss?" 

"That  is  the  fact.  And  the  Pacific  mills  that  I  have  spoken  of 
have  not  only  made  that  dividend,  but  their  capital  stock  has  been 
increased  from  $2,500,000  to  $5,000,000." 

"  What  about  its  being  a  fact,  publicly  known  to  the  whole  country, 
that  protection  through  the  imposition  of  tariff  laws  is  claimed  by 
members  of  Congress  for  the  benefit  of  American  labor?  Is  not  the 
tariff  adjusted,  or  said  to  be  adjusted,  so  as  to  afford  protection  to 
the  American  laborer,  by  enabling  the  manufacturer  to  pay  him  the 
highest  wages  for  his  work?  Is  not  that  the  general  ground  on  which 
it  is  claimed  that  there  should  be  protection?  " 

"  That  is  the  ground  upon  which  it  is  claimed,  but  that  is  not  the 
prevalent  opinion  among  the  working-people." 

"Then  while  this  protective  law  is  claimed  to  be  and  is  passed  in 
order  that  it  may  be  a  benefit  to  the  operatives  in  oxir  manufactories,  I 
want  to  know  how  much  benefit  they  actually  get  from  the  increased 
prices  which  the  protective  tariff  gives  to  the  product.  What  share  do 
the  operatives  receive  when  the  product  is  sold  and  the  proceeds  are 
divided  between  them  and  capital?  " 

"The  benefit?  Looking  at  the  wages  here,  compared  with  the 
wages  in  England,  I  cannot  see  any  benefit." 

"  That  is,  the  manufacturers  take  the  whole  benefit;  is  that  it?" 

"Yes.  They  will  go  over  to  Canada  and  bring  over  hordes  of 
French  people  here  to  work  in  our  mills  at  fifty  or  seventy-five  cents  a 
day." 


120  THE    PEOTECTIVE   TAEIFE. 

"Are  not  the  operatives  in  New  England  intelligent  enough  to 
know  that  this  protection  that  was  intended  for  them  in  the  passage  of 
this  tariff  law  does  not  reach  them,  and  is  not  that  one  reason  of  their 
discontent?" 

"Yes,  sir." 

"  Do  not  operatives  there  understand  that  they  do  not  get  the  benefit 
of  the  protective  laws  which  have  been  passed  by  Congress  for  their 
benefit?" 

"  Nine-tenths  of  the  intelligent  operatives  think  so." 

Mr.  Edward  King,  a  type-founder  and  a  prominent 
representative  of  the  Central  Labor  Union,  testified  before 
the  same  committee  as  follows  : 

"  Protection  has  been  unjust  in  not  protecting  the  working-man  in 
his  struggles  with  capital.  I  might  refer,  as  an  instance,  to  a  statement 
made  by  Mr.  Powderly,  who  represents  a  large  labor  organization.  He 
was  invited  to  address  a  large  public  meeting  in  the  city  of  New  York, 
which  was  supposed  to  be  held  under  the  auspices  of  the  working-men 
of  New  York  in  aid  of  the  protective  policy.  Mr.  Powderly,  to  my  own 
certain  knowledge,  excited  a  great  deal  of  comment  among  the  working- 
men,  who  owed  allegiance  to  him  as  an  officer  of  this  organization,  by 
the  very  fact  of  his  taking  any  action  on  that  question  in  association  with 
certain  capitalists,  and  in  the  supposed  interest  of  a  political  party. 
The  speech  that  he  made  on  that  occasion  was  freely  commented  on  by 
the  working-men,  and  the  general  opinion  I  found  to  be  that  while  he 
advocated  protection  he  still  maintained  that  it  was  necessary  for  the 
working-men  to  be  organized  and  to  fight  for  their  share  of  the  profits. 
That  proposition  meant  that,  living  on  wages  which  barely  supports  him, 
having  work  during  only  a  part  of  theyear,  and  being  almost  incapable 
of  supporting  a  good  organization,  tbe  working-man  is  still  to  keep  up 
this  struggle  for  protection,  because  it  is  necessary  to  Lave  this  '  protec- 
tion'in  tbe  interest  of  both  working-man  and  master;  and  thatwben 
protection  is  secured,  then  the  working-man  has  got  to  turn  around  and 
fight  his  master  or  employer  in  order  to  get  his  share.  So,  as  I  have 
said,  the  general  opinion  of  the  working  men  on  that  occasion  seemed 
to  be  that  it  was  a  kind  of  work  of  supererogation  on  the  part  of  the 
working-man  to  take  any  hand  in  defending  the  tariff,  when  it  was 
acknowledged  that  they  themselves  would  still 'have  to  keep  up  this 
fight  with  their  employers  for  their  share  of  the  profits,  and  to  keep  it 
up  also  a  grent  deal  more  bitterly  than  was  found  necessary  in  England 
under  free  trade. " 


LABOR  m   PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES.  121 

"  I  understood  you  to  make  the  statement  that  it  was  a  mistake  to 
call  the  wage-receiving  class  producers; — that  they  were  really  customers. 
Now  they  are  both,  are  they  not?" 

"  Exactly  so." 

"  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  in  the  cost  of  some  products  eighty  or  ninety 
per  cent  of  the  whole  is  labor?  " 

"  Yes,  sir." 

' '  Does  the  imposition  of  a  tariff  increase  the  price  of  the  products  of 
the  wage-receiving  class?" 

"  To  a  very  large  extent." 

"To  a  very  large  extent  the  tariff  increases  the  price  that  is  paid 
for  the  products  consumed  by  the  wage-receiving  class  and  by  others; 
now,  who  gets  the  increased  price  that  is  thus  put  upon  these  products  by 
the  tariff  ?    Is  it  the  laborer  or  is  it  the  manufacturer? " 

"  Well,  they  started  a  club  in  New  York  called  '  The  Somebody 
Club,'  which  ran  for  a  year.  It  was  based  upon  the  idea  of  finding  out 
who  it  was  that  got  that  surplus,  who  .was  '  Somebody '  that  got  it;  but  I 
believe  the  club  dispersed  without  discovering  who  he  was." 

"  Does  the  laborer  believe  that  he  gets  any  part  of  that  increased 
price?" 

"No,  sir;  there  is  only  one  thing  about  it  that  the  laborer  is  sure  of, 
and  that  is,  that  he  does  not  get  it." 

"Do  you  think  he  could  make  any  mistake  about  his  getting  it?" 

"  If  he  got  it  don't  you  suppose  he  would  know  it?" 

"  Well,  he  might,  but  he  hasn't  had  a  chance  yet.  When  I  empha- 
size the  fact  that  the  laborer  is  a  consumer,  and  when  I  say,  in  answer  to 
your  question,  that  the  commodities  which  labor  produces  are  raised  in 
price,  the  relation  of  that  last  statement  to  my  former  statement  is  that 
the  working-man  now  places  emphasis  upon  the  fact  that  he  is  a  con- 
sumer,— that  this  is  the  great  point,  and  as  a  consumer  he  intends  to 
regard  himself." 

"  As  a  public  fact  how  is  it; — where  does  the  burden  of  taxation 
fall?    It  falls  upon  the  consumer,  does  it  not? " 

"Yes,  ultimately;  but  still  more  ultimately  it  comes  out  of  the  pro- 
ducers." 

"Is it  not  a  fact  that  the  labor  of  a  country  bears  more  of  the 
burden  of  taxation  than  is  borne  by  the  non-laboring  class?" 

"Of  course,  ultimately.  When  I  say  ultimately,  I  mean  very 
ultimately." 

"If  a  tariff  is  imposed  on  these  products  to  increase  the  price,  is  it 
not  imposed  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  manufacturer  to  pay  his 


122  THE  PROTECTIVE  TARIFF. 

operatives  higher  wages?  Is  not  that  the  reason  assigned  why  the  rate 
of  duty  is  put  so  high?  Is  it  not  claimed  that  the  duty  ought  to  he  high 
so  as  to  enable  the  manufacturer  to  give  the  benefit  of  the  increased  prices 
so  obtained  to  his  employes?" 

*'  Yes,  that  is  the  claim." 

"Then  if  the  manufacturer  gets  protection  from  the  government 
on  that  claim,  is  it  not  right  and  proper  that  the  people,  for  whom  the 
protection  is  claimed,  should  get  the  benefit  of  it?" 

"I  should  think  so." 

"Now,  do  they  get  it?" 

"  They  do  not  think  so." 

But  the  most  irrefutable  testimony  in  proof  that  it  is 
not  the  worker  but  the  manufacturer  who  is  pocketing 
the  profits  secured  by  protection,  is  furnished  by  the 
well-known  advocate  of  protection,  Mr.  John  Jarrett,  the 
ex-president  of  the  Amalgamated  Iron  and  Steel  Workers 
of  the  United  States,  who,  in  1S86,  came  to  Illinois  per- 
sonally to  assist  in  defeating  "Wm.  R.  Morrison's  re-elec- 
tion to  Congress. 

Questioned  by  the  United  States  Senate  Committee 
on  Education  and  Labor  as  to  whether  the  wages  of  the 
iron- workers  increased  with  the  advance  in  prices  in  iron, 
Mr.  Jarrett  says : 

"  The  wages  of  labor  can  only  be  maintained  at  a  living  standard  by 
the  working-men  belonging  to  labor  organizations. 

"  I  could  name  to  you  mills  which  during  the  boom  of  1878  did  not 
advance  wages,  although  iron  advanced  from  two  and  one-half  to  four 
per  cent,  and  over  four  cents  a  pound.  When  iron  sold  at  four  cents  in 
the  market  they  did  not  advance  wages  one  cent." 

"  So  the  manufacturers  took  all  the  benefit  of  the  advance?" 

"  Tliey  took  it  all." 

There"  can  be  no  misunderstanding  about  the  state- 
ment of  these  intelligent  working-men.  No  professor  of 
political  economy  could  state  the  case  clearer  nor  more 
forcibly.  These  are  not  abstract  reasonings  of  free-trade 
theorists  :  they  are  a  simple,  candid  statement  of  facts,  vol- 


LABOR  IN  PROTECTED   INDUSTRIES  123 

unteered  by  men  who  work  in  so-called  protected  indus- 
tries. 

Now,  what  further  light  is  necessary  for  the  laboring 
man  to  see  that  he  is  being  outrageously  deceived  in  this 
matter  of  protection  ? 

Is  not  the  sum  and  substance  of  these  statements  a 
candid  acknowledgment  that  protection  does  not  protect 
the  working-man;  that  it  has  not  the  effect  of  increasing 
his  wages,  but  that  it  is  advocated  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
imreasing  the  manufacturer's  profits? 

If  these  statements  are  not  sufficient,  the  following 
additional  evidence,  that  the  most  outrageous  acts  of 
intimidation  are  resorted  to  in  manufacturing  districts,  to 
crush  out  these  annoying  labor  organizations,  may,  per- 
haps, open  the  eyes  of  the  blindest. 

As  this  question  of  intimidation  is  a  part  of  the  pro- 
tective system  a  portion  of  the  evidence  taken  by  the 
^Massachusetts  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  and  embodied 
in  the  report  of  the  United  States  Senate  Committee, 
is  here  reproduced.  One  of  the  features  of  this  inquisi- 
torial method  is  what  is  called  the  "black  list,"  which  is 
in  the  possession  of  the  manufacturers'  association. 

"This  list,"  says  the  committee  report,  "contains  the 
names  of  persons  that  it  will  not  be  safe  to  hire,  owing  to 
some  participation  in  a  strike  or  to  membership  in  some 
trade  organization." 

The  existence  of  that  list  was  denied  by  some  manu- 
facturers before  the  Senate  Committee  but  acknowledged 
to  by  others,  one  of  them  frankly  stating,  that  "  if  we 
wanted  to  black-list  a  man  we  could  undoubtedly  do  so. 
For  our  own  protection  we  started  a  secret  service, 
as  it  gave  us  the  names  and  occupations  of  the  most 
prominent  agitators." 


124  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

Here  we  have  a  set  of  manufacturers  unblushingly 
admitting  that  in  order  to  terrorize  their  working-men  into 
submission  to  all  of  their  exactions  they  have  organized 
all  through  the  State  of  Massachusetts  an  ignoble  system 
of  espionage. 

The  report  says : 

"  Nearly  all  of  the  Fall  River  operatives,  visited  by 
the  agent  of  the  State,  seemed  to  fear  the  possibility  of 
the  manufacturers  discovering  that  they  had  given  any 
information.  One  of  them  said,  and  his  statement  will 
cover  what  was  said  by  several  others  :  '  You  will  find 
that  very  few  of  the  operatives  will  say  anything  unless 
you  can  assure  them  that  their  names  will  never  be 
known.  If  it  were  known  that  I  was  giving  you  any 
information  I  should  be  discharged  at  once ;  so  you  see  I 
am  reposing  considerable  confidence  in  you.  My  bread 
is  at  stake,  and  were  I  asked  whether  I  had  given  you 
any  information  I  should  deny  it  from  the  beginning.'  " 

"  Under  these  circumstances,"  continues  the  report,  "  it 
was  necessary  to  proceed  with  caution,  but  in  the  major- 
ity of  cases  the  mere  promise  that  no  name  would  be 
mentioned  was  sufficient  to  gain  the  desired  information. " 

All  agreed  that  the  "  black  list "  wras  an  abominable 
institution,  one  that  embodied  all  that  was  pernicious  in  the 
system  of  spying.  The  universal  statement  was  that  the 
spinners  as  a  body  were  the  most  eagerly  punished  by  the 
black-listing,  it  being  asserted  that  thirty  members  of  the 
Spinners'  Union  were  on  the  black  list,  and  could  not  ob- 
tain work  in  any  mill  in  the  city.  One  operative  stated 
that  there  were  several  causes  that  led  to  dissatisfaction 
and  striking  in  Fall  River,  one  of  the  most  pronounced 
being  the  "  black  list." 

Of  all  the  testimony  given  before  the  United  States 


LABOR   IN    PROTECTED    INDNSTRIES.  125 

Senate  Committe  in  reference  to  the  condition  of  work- 
ing-men in  protected  industries,  of  the  nature  and  object 
of  their  organizations,  and  of  the  methods  resorted  to  by 
the  protected  bosses  to  break  up  these  unions,  the  follow- 
ing by  a  simdle  working-man  is  the  most  interesting,  and 
for  that  reason  we  reprint  it  verbatim  : 

Boston,  Mass.,  October  19,  1883.  Charles  J.  Chance  Jr.,  examined 
by  the  chairman : 

"  Where  do  you  live?  " 

"  In  Somerville,  Mass." 

"What  is  your  business? " 

"  I  am  a  currier;  have  worked  some  at  tanning,  but  am  a  journey- 
man currier." 

"  You  have  learned  that  trade,  have  you? " 

"  Yes;  I  served  my  time  at  it  and  learned  the  trade  thoroughly." 

"And  you  work  at  it  now  for  a  living?" 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"  Are  you  connected  with  any  labor  union?  " 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"  What  is  it?  " 

"  The  Tanners'  Union  of  Massachusetts." 

"  How  many  members  are  there  in  that  organization?  " 

"  About  twenty-three  hundred;  over  two  thousand  I  would  say." 

"  You  have  something  to  say  to  the  committee;  you  may  proceed 
to  state  it  now." 

"  Before  I  commence  on  anything  for  the  committee  I  would  state 
tuat  I  am  in  a  position  now;  but  having  taken  an  active  part  in  forming 
the  curriers'  union,  I  have  been  either  blacklisted  or  something  of  that 
sort,  so  that  it  was  almost  impossible  for  me  to  obtain  work  until  these 
last  two  weeks,  when  I  managed  to  get  into  a  place  where  they  had 
either  never  heard  my  name  or  not  known  so  much  about  the  union 
matter." 

"  Let  us  know  more  particularly  about  your  connection  with  the 
union  and  in  what  way  it  has  resulted  in  your  failure  to  get  work. 
AVlien  did  you  commence  these  efforts  and  what  did  you  do  by  way  of 
organization?     Where  were  vou  when  you  began?  " 

"  Here  in  Boston." 

"  Well,  what  did  you  do?  " 

"  I  started  in  speaking  for  the  men  to  join  the  organization." 


12G  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

"Speaking  to  them  in  public  meetings?" 

"  Yes,  some  of  them." 

"And  calling  meetings  yourself,  with  others,  I  suppose?" 

"  Yes,  we  called  meetings." 

"  Where  did  you  call  your  first  meeting?  " 

"  The  fir>t  one  that  I  called  myself  was  in  Charlestown." 

"  ITow  many  were  present  ?  " 

"  Twenty-eight." 

"  All  of  your  trade?  " 

"Yes." 

"  What  did  you  do  —  What  did  you  say  to  them? " 

"  I  didn't  say  a  great  deal.  I  gave  them  the  rules  of  organization 
of  the  union,  as  it  was  found  before  I  got  into  it,  and  encouraged  them 
to  form  a  branch  of  the  organization   in  Charlestown,  which  they  did." 

"What  reason  did  you  give  them  for  forming  such  an  organiza 
tion?" 

"  The  reason  we  gave  was  that  we  might  get  the  men  all  together; 
that  they  would  come  to  a  fair  understanding  between  themselves,  and 
in  time  regulate  the  price  of  wages  more  evenly  than  at  present." 

"  How  could  you  do  that  ? " 
"We  could  do  it,  and  have  done  it  since  the  organization  has  been 
started;  done  it  in  several  places  by  a  unanimous  movement  of  the  men, 
not  in  any  hard  manner,  as  by  strikes  or  anything  of  that  kind;  there 
has  been  no  severity  used  by  any  of  us;  it  was  done  in  a  legal  manner, 
by  the  men  waiting  on  the  firms  and  coming  to  an  understanding  with 
them  before  there  was  anj^  chance  of  a  strike." 

"  Have  there  been  any  strikes?  " 

"There  was  one  strike  in  Charlestown  shortly  after  tlie  organization 
was  formed.  The  proprietors  of  the  place,  Hubbard,  Buzzell  &  Blake, 
made  an  attempt  at  reduction  of  wages  and  a  demand  for  more  work. 
The  men  refused  to  agree  to  it,  and  appointed  a  committee  to  wait  upon 
them." 

"  They  wanted  the  men  to  take  less  pay  and  do  more  work? " 

"  Yes;  so  the  committee  waited  on  the  firm,  and  they  gave  them  a 
very  independent,  '  sassy  '  answer;  the  consequence  was  that  some  of 
the  men  were  discharged,  and  the  rest,  when  they  saw  how  matters 
stood,  left." 

"  You  protested  against  either  change  —  more  work  or  less  pay?  " 

"  Certainly.  We  didn't  want  to  have  any  change,  or  to  have  the 
union  brought  in  as  the  cause  of  it.  We  wanted  to  have  the  union  first 
fairly  started,  and  then  to  make  any  fair  arrangements  with  them;  but 


LABOR    IN    PROTECTED    INDUSTRIES.  127 

they  undertook  to  break  up  the  union  on  the  start;  that  was  their  idea, 
and  after  they  got  beaten  on  that,  they  gave  in  to  the  strike,  but  since 
then  they  have  discharged  the  eight  men  that  -waited  on  them  as  a 
committee. 

"  Were  you  on  the  committee?" 

"  I  was.  They  have  since  discharged,  as  I  say,  those  eight  men 
that  waited  on  them  as  a  committee,  and  the  members  of  the  firm  that 
I  have  spoken  of  promised  faithfully  that  after  things  had  been  settled 
there  would  be  no  hard  feelings  between  our  men  and  them." 

"  You  think,  then,  that  the  organization  prevented  the  reduction  of 
pay  and  the  increase  of  work?" 

"  Yes,  sir;  instead  of  getting  the  reduction  they  received  a  half- 
dollar  advance,  and  did  less  work.  The  men  working  in  these  currier 
shops  receive  small  wages,  as  a  general  thing,  all  through." 

"What  is  the  pay?" 

"  The  average  pay  of  a  currier  would  be  about  six  dollars  per 
week." 

"  A  aollar  a  day  ?" 

"Yes,  sir." 

"  Is  that  the  pay  of  a  first-class  workman?  " 

"  That  is  an  average  of  the  men." 

' '  Are  you  an  '  agitator  '?  " 

"No,  sir;  but  I  have  been  encouraging  unionism  as  much  as  pos- 
sible." 

"  We  have  heard  something  about  'agitators.'  You  do  not  look 
like  a  very  dangerous  men  in  the  community."  You  seem  to  be  a  peace- 
able man,  who  would  mind  his  business  and  do  his  work;  but  you 
have  delivered  some  addresses.     Do  you  think  that  was  right? " 

"Yes,  sir;  I  do.     Resistance  to  oppression  is  an  American  right." 

"  You  think  it  was  right  to  call  that  meeting  over  in  Charlestown 
and  try  to  organize  that  society?  Do  you  think  that  was  consistent  with 
your  duty  as  an  American  citizen?  " 

"Yes,  sir." 

' '  You  do  not  feel  condemned  for  it  at  all  ?  " 

"I  do  toot;  no,  sir.  I  think,  where  you  see  your  trade  is  getting 
ruined  and  getting  underneath,  it  is  about  time  something  should  be 
done;  and  if  one  man  don't  do  it,  somebody  will  have  to  take  hold  and 
do  it." 

"What  business  have  you  to  meddle  with  your  trade?" 

"  Well,  I  don't  know  that  I  have  any  business  to  meddle  with  it 
any  more  than  the  bosses  have  to  meddle  with  us.    When  they  come 


128  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

to  cut  us  down  and  demand  of  us  work  that  we  will  not  or  cannot  do,  it 
is  time  somebody  did  something." 

"  Do  you  really  think  so? " 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"  You  have  got  that  idea  in  regard  to  your  relation  to  society  and 
your  right  as  a  man?  " 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"And  you  still  insist  that  you  had  a  right  to  do  it,  and  are  not  to 
be  condemned  for  doing  it?    Of  what  consequence  is  your  trade  to  you?" 

"  Of  what  consequence?    I  have  to  make  a  living  by  it." 

"  Do  you  think  you  have  a  right  to  make  a  living?" 

"  Well,  according  to  the  idea  of  some  men  a  working-man  has  no 
right  to  make  a  living." 

"  Then  you  were  wrong  in  making  that  speech  over  in  Charlestown, 
were  you  not?" 

"  No,  sir." 

"  Is  there  any  other  point  that  you  have  on  your  mind  which  you 
wish  to  state?  " 

"  Out  here  in  Roxbury  there  is  a  shop  running  some  eighty  men, 
and  the  proprietor  of  that  concern  has  threatened  to  break  up  the  union, 
or  the  '  clique,'  as  he  calls  it,  and  he  has  commenced  already  to  dis- 
charge men  that  belong  to  the  union." 

"  That  is  simply  because  they  do  belong  to  the  union?  " 

"  Yes." 

"Why  do  they  want  to  break  up  the  union?  What  reasons  do  they 
give?  " 

"  That  the  men  will  be  wanting  to  get  more  pay  when  they  become 
organized." 

"  How  do  you  know  that  they  give  that  as  a  reason?  " 

"  They  have  told  the  men  that." 

"  They  have  themselves  told  the  men?  " 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"  Do  they  claim  that  they  are  unable  to  give  more  pay?  " 

"No.  There  are  men  that  would  be  willing  to  come  here  and 
testify,  but,  like  myself,  they  know  that  as  soon  as  they  get  here  they 
are  done  for.  I  have  spoken  to  several  of  them,  but  they  are  all  afraid. 
They  are  union  men  but  are  afraid  to  come  out  in  public  and  give 
any  voice  to  their  wrongs.  It  is  a  general  feeling  that  all  working-men 
have,  and  I  believe  that  I  will  be  the  only  tanner  and  currier  that  you 
will  find  to  come  before  you.     There  may  be  one  or  two  more  that 


LABOR  IN  PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES.  129 

would  come  if  they  could  possibly  get  together,  but  as  a  general  thing 
they  have  all  got  this  fear  in  them.. . 

John  Morrison,  machinist  in  New  York  city,  testified 
before  the  United  States  Senate  Committee  as  follows  : 

"  Where  do  you  work?  " 

"  I  would  rather  not  have  it  in  print.  Perhaps  I  would  have  to  go 
Monday  morning  if  I  did.  We  are  so  situated  in  the  machinist's  trade 
that  we  darn't  let  them  know  much  about  us.  If  they  know  that  we 
open  our  mouths  on  the  labor  question  and  try  to  form  organizations 
we  are  quietly  told  that  '  business  is  slack,'  and  we  have  to  go." 

"  Do  you  know  of  anybody  being  discharged  for  making  speeches 
on  the  labor  question? " 

"Yes;  I  do  know  of  several  members  of  the  organization  that  I 
belong  to  who  were  discharged  because  it  was  discovered  they  were 
members  of  the  organization." 

"Do  you  say  those  men  were  members  of  the  same  organization 
that  you  belonged  to?  " 

"  Yes,  sir;  but  not  working  in  the  same  place  where  I  work.  And, 
in  fact,  many  of  my  trade  have  been  on  the  '  black  list '  and  have  had 
to  leave  town  to  find  work." 

The  well-known  protectionist,  John  Jarrett,  also  testi- 
fied in  reference  to  the  intimidation  of  the  working-men 
in  the  Pennsylvania  rolling-mills  . 

"  We  are  unable  to  organize  the  men  who  are  working  in  these 
mills,  from  the  fact  that  they  are  completely  demoralized  and  are  afraid 
that  they  will  be  connected  with  our  organization,  knowing  that  they 
will  be  discharged  if  they  are.  I  can  give  you  instances  that  took  place 
under  my  own  observation  not  two  years  ago.  I  went  into  one  of  these 
rolling-mills  to  speak  with  a  person  there.  It  was  the  Pennsylvania 
Steel  Works,  at  Steelton,  near  Harrisburg.  I  spoke  to  a  person  there 
in  the  mill  about  organization.  Of  course,  if  they  knew  who  I  was,  it 
is  not  very  likely  that  they  would  have  allowed  me  in,  but  I  was  inside 
the  mill  and  was  talking  with  this  man  about  organization,  and  one 
thing  and  another,  and  the  very  next  day  that  man  was  discharged 
without  being  told  anything  about  the  reason,  and,  of  course,  he  natu- 
rally drew  the  conclusion  that  he  was  discharged  because  he  happened 
to  be  talking  with  me.  Of  course,  I  could  not  subject  any  of  the  other 
men  in  that  mill  to  that  risk;  so  you  can  see  that  when  working-men 
are  in  this  condition  we  have  reached  a  very  demoralized  state  of 
affairs," 


130  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

The  testimony  of  Robert  Howard  —  whose  evidence 
"  on  the  share  of  labor  in  the  profits  of  manufacture ''  has 
been  given  already  —  in  reference  to  the  reported  intimi- 
dation of  the  operatives  of  cotton  and  woolen  mills  in 
Massachusetts,  is  as  follows : 

"Now  there  is  one  remarkable  thing  in  Massachusetts,  and  that  is 
that  if  ever  a  bill  is  brought  before  our  legislature  for  the  redress  of 
some  grievance  which  may  exist,  or  if  the  working-men  come  to  the 
legislature  asking  for  some  law  which  may  be  beneficial  to  their  interests 
as  working-men,  such  a  law  as  that  they  shall  be  paid  weekly,  or  a  law 
providing  for  boards  of  arbitration,  or  a  law  to  make  the  ten-hour  rule 
more  stringent  —  if  there  is  a  bill  of  any  of  these  kinds  brought  before 
our  legislature,  you  will  always  see  the  corporation  detectives  there, 
particularly  from  Lowell  and  from  Lawrence.  Lowell  wishes  itself  to 
be  looked  upon  as  the  working-man's  paradise  of  Massachusetts,  but  it 
is  the  worst  place  in  Massachusetts  and  pays  the  lowest  prices  to  work- 
ing-men. The  Lowell  manufacturers  always  have  a  ring  of  men  down 
at  the  State-house.  It  was  that  Merrimac  corporation  that  got  us 
reduced  ten  per  cent  in  1880.  When  the  Board  of  Manufacturers  met, 
the  others  said  to  us,  '  You  make  that  Merrimac  Company  pay  the  same 
as  we  are  paying;  they  can  undersell  us  as  things  are.'  There  are  men 
there  running  fifteen  hundred  spindles  for  about  $9.50  a  week,  while 
in  the  other  New  England  mills  they  can  pay  $12  a  week.  They  have  a 
man  named  Moses  Sargent  who  is  there  at  the  State-house  every  week, 
and  when  I  was  on  the  Legislative  Committee  I  used  to  see  him  watch- 
ing every  man  that  came  in,  so  that  a  Lowell  man  that  had  to  earn  his 
bread  in  the  mills  dare  not  put  his  head  into  the  committee  room.  The 
same  is  true  in  Lawrence.  They  had  a  detective  named  JFilbrook  always 
watching  to  see  if  any  Lawrence  men  came  before  the  committee  to  give 
testimony.  Then,  after  the  meetings  were  over,  they  would  say,  '  There 
are  those  Fall  River  fellows;  they  are  a  turbulent  set.'  It  is  not  that  we 
in  Fall  River  are  turbulent;  it  is  because  we  had  manhood  enough  and 
nerve  enough  to  go  and  ask  and  demand  what  was  our  right,  that  they 
say  that  about  us.  There  are  no  Fall  River  detectives  at  the  State- 
house.  I  went  to  a  meeting  of  the  mule-spinners  at  Lawrence  some  six 
or  seven  weeks  ago.  When  the  time  came  that  was  appointed  for  the 
meeting,  there  across  the  road  stood  Filbrook,  the  corporation  detective, 
and  Russell,  the  overseer,  watching  every  man  that  came  in.  There 
was  one  man  at  that  meeting  who  was  looking  out  of  the  window  at 
them  and  he  said,  '  I  never  belonged  to  a  union  in  my  life,  Howard,  but 


LABOR  IN  PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES.  131 

nothing'does  so  much  as  the  presence  of  these  men  there  to  convince  me 
that  there  must  be  some  good  for  the  working-men  in  unions,  for  unless 
there  was  they  would  not  stand  there  spying  us  as  we  come  in.'  That 
is  the  condition  of  affairs.  These  manufacturers  have  their  detectives 
employed  permanently.  I  have  been  told  that  Filbrook  gets  a  salary  of 
$6,000  a  year  from  the  Pacific  mills  alone." 

Thus  is  the  word  protection — whicQ  in  its  true  signifi- 
cation conveys  the  idea  that  the  weak,  the  humble  and 
helpless  are  being  shielded  from  oppression  and  injury — 
prostituted  for  the  base  purpose  of  oppressing  and  injuring 
a  class  of  our  people  whose  fate  it  is  to  labor  and  to  suffer. 

The  shallowness  of  the  pretense,  that  the  protective 
system  is  a  necessity  to  maintain  a  respectable  standard 
of  wages  for  the  American  working-men,  is  further 
exposed  in  the  £2  a  thousand  tariff  on  lumber. 

In  order  to  bring  this  matter  in  its  true  light  before 
the  reader,  it  will  be  necessary  to  consider  the  claims 
made  by  the  owners  of  pine  lands  in  support  of  the  pro- 
tective system.  This  can  best  be  done  by  producing  the 
testimony  before  the  Tariff  Commission  of  the  representa- 
tive of  a  large  association  of  lumbermen,  and  of  indi- 
vidual business  men  engaged  in  the  manufacture  and 
trade  of  lumber. 

At  the  meeting  of  the  commission  m  Chicago,  Septem- 
ber 7, 1882,  Mr.  J.  A.  Whittier,  President  of  the  Saginaw 
(Mich.)  Board  of  Trade,  made  a  statement  of  which  the 
following  is  a  synopsis  : 

"The  total  product  of  Michigan  in  1881  was  four  billion  feet  of 
pine  lumber.  Capital  invested  in  its  manufacture,  $40,000,000.  Twenty- 
one  thousand  men  were  engaged  in  saw-mills  at  wages  averaging  $2 
per  day.  Thirty-five  thousand  men  were  engaged  in  logging  at  $1,75 
per  day.  The  mill  men  are  employed  two  hundred  days,  the  logging 
men  150  days  during  the  year.  Total  estimate  of  yearly  wages  paid, 
$17,585,500." 

In  order  to  impress  the   Tariff  Commission,  and  the 


132  THE   PEOTECTIVE   TAKIFF. 

public  through  its  report,  with  the  necessity  of  laying  a 
tax  of  $2  a  thousand  upon  the  millions  of  lumber  con- 
sumers, this  wealthy  defender  of  the  American  wage- 
earner  thus  pathetically  describes  the  magnitude  of  the 
interests  involved : 

"If  we  take  in  the  whole  lumber  industry  of  the  United  States 
we  shall  find  9,000  men  working  in  mills,  and  135,000  in  forests, 
with  yearly  wages  of  $80,000,000,  and  a  total  product  of  $230. 
000,000.  The  standing  pine  tree  in  the  forest  is  the  raw  material,  and 
for  that  '  a  round  sum  is  paid,'  and  the  conversion  of  that  raw  material 
into  lumber  is  done  by  the  steady  stroke  of  the  ax  and  solid  days'  work 
by  this  army  of  men,  and  he  estimated  cost  of  producing  lumber  si 
$13.50  per  thousand  feet;  the  average  price  received  is  $14,57,  leaving 
$1.07  profit." 

In  this  estimate  of  cost  the  item  of  stumpage,  that  is, 
the  privilege  of  cutting  the  timber  from  the  owner's  land, 
or  the  value  put  upon  it  by  the  manufacturer  owning  the 
pine  land  himself,  is  put  down  at  the  nice  "  little  sum  "  of 
$4.50  a  thousand  feet. 

Mr.  Whittier  informs  the  commission  that  $80,000,000 
are  paid  yearly  in  wages  to  the  operators  in  the  lumber 
business  of  the  United  States,  and  that  the  value  of  the 
product  is  $230,000,000 ;  but  he  fails  to  tell  the  commis- 
sion that  in  the  $80,000,000  wages  paid,  the  amount  of 
the  $2  a  thousand  tax,  or  $46,000,000  collected  from  the 
consumers,  is  included,  and  that  consequenty  all  the 
money  paid  in  wages  by  the  operators  out  of  their  capital 
or  profit  on  the  products  is  $34,000,000.  By  deducting 
this  amount  from  the  value  of  the  total  product,  we  have 
$196,000,000,  which  goes  for  stumpage,  machinery,  repairs, 
interest  on  capital  and  profit  to  the  lumber  bosses. 

"  There  are  millions  in  protection  to  American  labor," 
they  say,  and  it  is  on  that  account  that  the  lumber  lords 
of  the  Northwest  are  "  laboring  "  so  hard  to  maintain  it. 

The  item  of  "  stumpage,"  an  altogether  fictitious  value, 


LABOE   IN   PROTECTED   INDUSTRIES.  133 

is  the  worm  in  the  meal-tub.  It  is,  in  railroad  terms,  the 
"  watered  stock  "  of  the  lumber  operators,  through  which 
they  have  been  amassing  such  immense  fortunes. 

As  stated  by  a  prominent  Chicago  lumber  merchant, 
and  a  thoroughly  informed  gentleman,  before  the  same 
Tariff  Commission  : 

"The  power  of  this  association  is  getting  to  be  a  little  dangerous, 
as  it  appears  to  rue,  and  as  it  would  appear  by  the  rapid  advance  in 
stumpage.  I  remember  some  fifteen  years  ago  the  stumpage  was  gener- 
ally estimated  at  fifty  cents  a  thousand.  His  land  cost  him  $1.25  to 
$2.50  an  acre.  He  has  a  good  profit  at  fifty  cents.  But  if  the  stump- 
age of  the  Northwest  is  gradually  gathered  into  a  few  hands,  they 
have  the  power  to  form  combinations  that  have  the  effect  to  bull  up  the 
price  of  lumber.  The  operations  of  these  manufacturers,  who  all 
appear  to  run  in  one  groove,  have  been  advancing  the  price  of  lumber  the 
last  two  or  three  years  out  of  proportion  to  former  years. 

' '  I  took  occasion  last  evening  to  gather  from  my  books  some  statistics 
of  the  cost  of  lumber  for  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years,  and  I  have  it 
accurately  extended.  I  have  been  a  lumber  buyer  in  this  market,  and 
have  probably  bought,  during  that  time,  not  less  than  10,000,000  feet  of 
lumber,  and  from  that  to  25,000,000.  There  are  other  dealershere  who 
are  similarly  situated.  You  will  understand  that  Chicago  does  a  busi- 
ness exceeding  2,000,000,000  per  year,  making  it  by  far  the  largest 
market  on  the  globe  for  the  sale  of  lumber,  and  over  one-half  of  the 
gentlemen  doing  business  here  do  not  own  a  single  acre  of  stumpage. 
They  buy  from  the  lumber  operators  and  stump  owners.  I  notice  that 
for  the  year  prior  to  the  fire,  up  to  October  9,  1871,  lumber  cost  me  (and 
my  neighbors  as  well,  for  we  buy  side  by  side)  $14.46  per  thousand  feet. 
I  notice  in  the  estimate  of  the  Saginaw  gentlemen  that  they  figure  the 
absolute  cost  of  lumber  at  $13.50  to  the  manufacturer.  As  the  transpor- 
tation from  Saginaw  here  is  sometimes  $2  or  $3  per  thousand  (I  have 
paid  as  high  as  $4),  you  will  see  that  they  have  been  doing  business  at  a 
tremendous  loss,  and  that  is  the  reason  they  are  so  wealthy  now,  I 
presume! 

"  The  great  fire  in  Chicago  necessarily  had  an  effect  upon  the  value 
of  lumber.  It  had  the  more  effect  because  lumber  was  not  one  of  the 
items  upon  which  a  rebate  was  allowed.  You  will  remember  that  when 
the  world  was  weeping  at  Chicago's  impoverished  condition  Congress 
passed  a  law  giving  the  rebuilders  of  the  city  a  rebate  upon  glass,  iron 


134  THE   rKOTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

and  everything  else  in  the  way  of  construction  material.  The  lumher 
interest,  however,  would  not  submit  to  a  rebate,  and  this  was  the  effect: 
Lumber  for  1872,  following  the  fire,  cost  the  people  $16.80  per  thousand 
feet.  That  was  the  average  cost  the  whole  year.  So  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  lumber  manufacturers  and  the  stump  owners  were  benefited  to  the 
extent  of  about  $2.50  a  thousand  in  consequence  of  the  Chicago  fire.  If 
the  duty  had  been  off,  or  the  rebate  had  been  allowed,  the  lumber 
dealers  would  only  have  been  benefited  to  the  extent  of  fity  cents;  but,  as 
it  was,  they  made  a  great  deal  of  money  out  of  the  Chicago  fire. 

"  For  the  year  1873,  two  years  after  the  fire,  the  average  cost  of  lum- 
ber was  $12.72,  a  falling  off,  you  see,  of  over  $4  a  thousand.  Things  were 
beginning  to  regulate  themselves. 

"In  1875  it  was  $11.68,  a  falling  off  of  another  dollar  a  thousand. 

"  Now  we  strike  the  proper  medium  of  trade,  I  presume,  without  the 
disturbing  element  of  the  Chicago  fire.  In  1876  it  was  $9.67,  Saginaw 
losing  a  tremendous  sight  of  money  you  see.  I  don't  know  how  they 
can  exist  at  all ! 

"  In  1877  it  was  $9.73. 

"In  1878  it  was  $9.66. 

"  These  figures  I  can  verify  by  oath  to  any  extent.  But  now,  gentle- 
men, this  is  what  I  wanted  to  call  your  attention  to  cspecialty.  In  1880 
a  little  boom  started,  and  the  stumpaee  being  reduced  to  a  small  amount 
could  be  easily  handled,  and  an  advance  was  made  to  $11.63  on  the 
average. 

"  In  1881  it  was  still  growing,  and  reached  $13.92. 

"In  1882  my  lumber  cost  me  between  $14  and  $15  a  thousand. 

"  That  is  the  direction  it  has  taken.  It  is  in  consequence  of  the  man- 
ipulation of  the  stumpage.  I  can  see  no  earthly  reason  why  the  Amer- 
ican interest  should  have  any  protection.  Only  in  one  thing,  from  my 
standpoint,  do  I  see  that  it  applies.  I  believe  that  we  can  produce  corn, 
pork  and  beans  in  Illinois,  and  those  are  the  things  that  enter  into  the 
lumber  business.  I  do  not  see  why  a  Canadian  should  work  for  $10 
a  month  when  he  could  pass  over  an  imaginary  line  into  the  United 
States  and  get  $20  a  month.  I  believe  that  the  laborer  upon  the  Cana- 
dian side  is  paid  equal  to  our  laborer  here,  and  I  see  no  sense  in  anything 
else,  and  I  object  to  the  proposition  that  he  is  not  paid  so  well,  unless  it 
may  be  that  provisions  would  cost  less  in  Canada  than  (hey  doherc;  and, 
as  I  have  before  remarked,  pork,  corn  and  beans  is  the  power  that  runs 
the  lumber  business.  Now,  I  believe  that  the  cost  of  pork,  corn  and 
beans  in  the  states  of  Illinois,  Michigan  and  Wisconsin  cannot  far  exceed 
the  same  article  in  Canada.     They  may  be  able  to  raise  beans  up  there 


LABOR  IN  PROTECTED  INDUSTRIES.  135 

a  little  cheaper;  I  don't  know  how  that  is.  But  against  that  there 
exists  this  consideration:  that  the  Canadian  has  to  pay  anywhere 
from  $1  up,  or  more,  for  taking  his  lumber  to  market  than  the  American 
does,  and  the  freight,  as  I  understand,  from  Georgian  Bay  to  Buffalo  at 
the  present  time  is  about  $3  a  thousand,  while  the  freight  from  Saginaw 
is  about  $2.  There  is  $1  against  them,  for  Saginaw  could  not  get  lumber 
in  this  direction  over  these  broad  prairies,  where  so  much  lumber  is 
used,  for  less  than  $2  a  thousand.  There  must  be  a  margin,  at  least  of 
$2alhousand  against  them  in  the  delivery  of  lumber  to  our  section  here. 

The  manufacturer  of  lumber  in  Michigan  has  other  advantages 
incident  to  his  manufacture.  He  can  utilize  the  offal,  the  worthless 
product,  so  to  speak,  of  his  logs.  He  utilizes  his  sawdust  and  sells  his 
slabs  for  firewood.  And  I  understand  there  has  recently  been  discovered 
a  process  by  which  whisky  is  made  from  sawdust,  and  when  that  ulti- 
matum is  reached  the  manufacturer  of  lumber  will  be  solid,  indeed. 

Having,  then,  the  advantage  of  a  revenue  from  his  offal,  and  the 
advantage  of  from  $1  to  $3  in  the  delivery  of  lumber,  I  cannot  for  the 
life  of  me  see  why  he  should  be  further  protected  by  the  advantage  of 
$2  duty. 

Taking  for  granted  the  estimate  made  by  the  Saginaw  gentlemen 
that  the  expense  of  the  manufacture  of  lumber  is  $13.50  per  thousand 
(and,  of  course,  I  question  his  figures  all  the  way  through),  you  will  see 
that  he  admits  that  after  paying  a  stumpage  tax  of  $4.50  he  still  has  a 
profit  of  $1.07,  with  which  he  has  acknowledged  himself  satisfied. 
Now  let  us  throw  off  this  $2  duty  and  give  him  only  a  stumpage  of 
$2 .  50.  According  to  late  estimates,  which  are  credited  to  the  man- 
ufacturers, there  stands  now  upon  the  peninsula,  reckoning  from 
Ludington  east  to  the  Saginaw  Valley,  an  average  of  5,000  feet  of 
timber  on  each  acre  of  ground.  Giving  him  a  stumpage  tax  of  $2.50 
would  still  pay  him  $12.50  an  acre  for  every  acre  of  that  ground,  even 
if  it  were  pine  barrens.  Hence,  he  would  receive  $2.50  for  each  thou- 
sand of  stumpage." 

It  would  thus  appear  that  the  cC  round  sum  "  of  $4.50 
for  stumpage,  as  stated  by  the  president  of  the  Saginaw 
Board  of  Trade,  is  simply  the  "round  sum"  credited  to 
themselves  in  figuring  out  the  cost  of  lumber,  and  is  thus 
swelled  merely  for  the  purpose  of  deceiving  the  public  in 
regard  to  the  actual  amount  of  their  profits,  which,  allow- 
ing the  liberal  sum  of  $2.50  for  stumpage,  as  before  stated, 


i36  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

would  show  the  profit  on  the  price  of  $14.57  per  thou- 
sand feet  to  be  $3.57  instead  of  $1.07,  as  stated  by  the 
president  of  the  Saginaw  association. 

But  since  1881,  owing  to  the  rapid  increase  in  the  price 
of  stumpage,  the  price  of  lumber  has  been  steadily  on  the 
increase,  so  that  on  July  26, 1887,  the  market  report  of 
the  Chicago  Times  shows  the  price  of  lumber  by  the  cargo 
to  be : 

Dimension,  long,  green $12  00  to  $15  00 

Dimension,  short,  green 10  50 

Common  boards  and  strips 13  00  to    14  00 

Medium  boards  and  strips 14  50  to    16  00 

No.  1  boards  and  strips 16  50  to    20  00 

How  about  the  price  of  labor  ?  Has  that  kept  pace 
with  the  stumpage  of  the  land  owners  and  the  price  of  the 
product  %    Let  us  see. 

Alex.  G.  Burman,  of  Manistee,  who  is  at  the  head  of  the 
organization  of  the  Knights  of  Labor  in  Michigan,  recently 
transmitted  to  the  press  of  that  State  the  resolutions  unan- 
imously adopted  by  District  Assembly  83  in  favor  of  the 
abolition  of  the  tariff  on  lumber,  and  at  the  same  time  pre- 
sented the  facts  as  to  the  "protection  given  to  the  workers 
by  the  $2  a  thousand  tariff  "  in  the  following  paragraphs : 

Average  price  five  years  ago :  Wages  paid  to  men 
employed  in  the  logging  camps  per  month  and  board, 
$30 ;  wages  paid  to  men  in  and  about  saw-mills  per  month 
without  board,  $40 ;  custom-mills  received  from  manufact- 
uring, from  $3.50  up  to  $4.50  a  thousand  feet;  pine 
stumpage,  from  $6  to  $7  a  thousand  feet  —  the  pine  almost 
on  the  river  banks. 

At  the  present  time  wages  m  logging  camps  per 
month,  with  board,  $18 ;  wages  in  and  about  saw-mills 
per  month,  without  board,  $30 ;  custom-mills  receive  to- 
day $1.50  to  $2.75  per  thousand.     Pine  cannot  be  bought 


LABOE   IN   FEOTECTED   INDUSTRIES.  137 

to-day  for  less  than  $10  per  thousand,  and  far  off  from 
the  rivers." 

Ten  dollars  for  stumpage,  or  $47.50  profit  per  acre  of 
pine  land  for  the  lumber  kings,  and  $18,  with  board  per 
month  for  each  of  the  "army  of  men,  who,  by  the  sturdy 
stroke  of  the  axe,  do  the  solid  day's  work,"  in  wages. 

And  all  this  lying  about  protection  to  American  labor, 
in  our  lumber  interests,  is  easily  swallowed  on  account  of 
the  unfathomable  stupidity  of  a  portion  of  our  working- 
men  who  actually  believe  that  all,  or  a  large  portion  of  the 
$2  import  tax  ultimately  enures  to  their  benefit. 

Don't  they  see  that  it  is  the  high-priced  "stumpage"  of 
the  American  owner  of  pine  land  which  is  protected 
against  the  low-priced  "stumpage"  of  Canada,  and  not 
the  cheaper  Canadian  labor,  which,  under  the  "  free-trade 
in  labor"  plan,  and  without  the  slightest  hindrance, 
crosses  the  American  border  in  droves  to  compete  with 
the  wages  of  the  American  lumber  worker  %  However, 
a  goodly  share  of  the  "unfathomable  stupidity"  men- 
tioned above,  if  not  downright  rascality,  is  to  be  placed  to 
the  credit  of  those  members  of  Congress  who,  with  the 
above  facts  and  figures  before  them,  bv  their  votes  are 
laying  a  senseless  and  useless  embargo  upon  Canadian 
lumber. 

But  the  evil  of  this  lumber  tax  consists  not  only  in 
swindling  the  laborer  and  the  consumer ;  it  is  inflicting 
serious  injury  upon  the  whole  country  by  the  wanton 
destruction  of  our  merchantable  timber,  which,  it  has 
been  calculated,  will,  be  completed  before  the  close  of 
this  century.  When  this  will  have  taken  place,  a  clever 
statistician  asserts,  that  the  entire  marine  of  the  world 
cannot  carry  enough  to  supply  the  demand  in  the  United 
States. 


OUR  PAUPER  LABOR. 


OF  all  the  arguments  used  by  protectionists  to  bolster 
up  their  ignoble  system,  that  of  "  European  pauper 
labor"  is  the  most  deceiving. 

Relying  upon  the  gullibility  of  the  unthinking,  it  is 
not  of  the  slightest  consequence  to  them  that  the  terms 
"  pauper  labor,"  and  "  pauper  wages  "  are  meaningless  in 
fact,  since  paupers  do  not  work  and,  consequently,  do  not 
earn  any  wages,  but  as  a  rule  are  supported  at  the  expense 
of  the  charitable  public. 

It  is  clear  that  in  using  these  terms,  the  impression 
sought  to  be  conve}Ted  is  that  European  laborers  are  as 
miserably  situated,  as  poorly  clad  and  fed  as  the  paupers 
in  the  public  almshouses,  and  that  the  standard  of  their 
wages  is  just  high  enough  to  keep  them  and  their  families 
from  starvation.  It  was  found  advisable  to  keep  this 
picture  of  human  wretchedness  prevailing  among  the 
poorer  classes  of  the  old  country  constantly  before  the 
eyes  of  the  American  working-men,  evidently  to  serve  as 
a  reminder  that  unless  they  assisted  with  their  Azotes  in 
maintaining  the  protective  system,  or  if  the  tariff  reformers 
were  permitted  to  lower  the  taxes  on  imported  goods,  they 
would  soon  share  the  fate  of  the  "  pauper  laborers  of 
free-trade  England."  In  order  to  give  a  semblance  of  fact 
to  their  claim,  R.  P.  Porter,  who  was  the  proxy  of  Pig-iron 
Kelly  on  the  Tariff  Commission,  was  selected  as  a  fit  rep- 
resentative of  the  spoliation  system  and  dispatched  to 
England,  in  the  guise  of  a  philanthropist,  with  a  view  to 


138 


OUR   PAUPER   LABOR.  139 

examine  into  the  condition  of  the  working  classes  in  that 
free-trade  country. 

Mr.  Porter  is  an  Englishman  by  birth,  and,  like  the 
bird  who  befouls  his  own  nest,  has  most  faithfully 
performed  the  mandate  of  his  protectionist  task-masters, 
by  sending  exaggerated  and  deceptive  reports  to  Ameri- 
ican  newspapers,  in  which  the  wretched  condition  and 
pauperism  of  the  "  toilers "  of  free-trade  England  are 
pictured  with  harrowing  details.  That  these  reports  are 
not  written  for  information,  but  for  the  express  purpose 
of  being:  used  as  "  scare-crows  "  for  the  credulous  Ameri- 
can  "  toiler,"  is  apparent  from  the  fact  that  Mr.  Porter 
studiously  avoids  making  comparisons  between  the  condi- 
tions prevailing  before  the  "  free-trade"  system  had  fairly 
been  inaugurated  in  England  and  after.  lie  does  not  in- 
form his  American  readers  of  the  fact  that  the  condition, 
the  wages,  the  mode  of  living,  as  well  as  the  morals  of 
the  laboring  class,  have  improved  a  hundred  per  cent 
since  England's  present  fiscal  system  has  been  introduced. 
He  is  silent  about  the  fact  that  forty  years  ago,  under 
the  strictly  protective  system,  the  number  of  able-bocued 
paupers  in  the  United  Kingdom,  with  a  population  of 
less  than  29,000,000,  was  934,419,  and  that  in  1SS3, 
after  the  long  period  of  practical  free  trade,  and  with  an 
increased  population  of  over  36,000,000,  the  number  of 
able-bodied  paupers  had  actually  decreased  to  799,296. 
Again,  in  speaking  of  the  degradation  prevailing  among 
the  English  working  classes  to-day,  as  a  true  renegade,  Mr. 
Porter  fails  to  do  justice  to  his  native  land  by  avoiding  to 
mention  the  eloquent  fact  that  in  1S46,  under  an  exor- 
bitant protective  tariff  system,  the  annual  convictions  in 
the  United  Kingdom  were  41,008,  against  15,898  in  1882, 
under  the  free-trade  system. 


140  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

For  the  purpose  of  throwing  light  upon  the  subject  of 
"pauper  labor  in  Europe,"  which  as  a  "scarecrow"  is 
rendering  such  effective  service  to  the  protectionists,  we 
will  now  furnish  the  testimony  of  reliable  journals,  and 
of  "protected  workingmen,"  with  reference  to  our  own 
pauper  labor. 

We  have  selected  but  a  few  of  these  reports;  they 
will,  however,  suffice  to  give  a  general  idea  of  the  condi- 
tion of  the  people  Avhose  fate  it  is  to  earn  a  livelihood  in 
our  so-called  protected  industries. 

On  February  6,  1884,  the  Cleveland  Herald, — good 
protectionist  authority,  —  contained  the  following : 

For  some  time  past  all  sorts  of  stories  have  been  circulated  in  refer- 
ence to  the  suffering  of  the  miners  and  their  families  scattered  along  the 
Pennsylvania  railroad  between  this  city  and  Allenlown.  These  people 
have  had  their  wages  reduced  from  time  to  time  until  they  are  now  only 
getting  from  sixty  to  seventy  cents  per  day,  or  an  average  of  about 
sixty  five  cents.  These  reports  have  excited  considerable  comment,  and 
in  order  to  verify  them  a  Herald  correspondent  visited  the  mines. 

"After  arriving  in  Alburtis,  Pa.,"  writes  the  correspondent,"  I 
procured  a  sleigh  and  drove  through  the  entire  district,  covering  some 
thirty  miles,  and  visited  many  homes  ^f  the  miners,  beside  some  forty- 
five  mines  in  full  operation.  Alburtis  has  a  population  of  nearly  six 
hundred  people,  and  their  true  condition  is  probably  expressed  in  the 
words  of  Isaac  Bickel,  proprietor  of  the  American  House,  who  said: 

' '  '  Never  in  the  history  of  the  town  has  there  been  so  much  suffering 
among  the  poor.  The  panic  of  1873  is  no  comparison.  The  store- 
keepers have  shut  down  on  the  men,  and  are  now  doing  a  strictly  cash 
business  throughout  the  ore  district.' 

"  George  Schrack,  residing  in  a  small  log  hut  near  Farmington, 
was  called'on  in  the  evening.  The  picture  presented  here  was  one  of 
extreme  pity.  The  children,  four  in  number,  were  found  huddled 
together  about  the  stove.  They  were  thinly  clad  and  three  of  them  were 
suffering  with  the  measles.  The  floor  was  carpetless  and  the  room  pre- 
sented a  dismal  appearance.  The  furniture  was  old  and  bore  evidence 
of  hard  usage.  The  bed-room  adjoining  the  kitchen  contained  two 
beds,  in  which  the  entire  family  slept.  Two  of  the  window  panes  were 
broken  out  and  stuffed  with  old  clothes.     Mr.  Schrack.  who  works  in 


OUR   PAUPER   LABOR,  lttl 

one  of  the  mines  in  East  Texas,  five  miles  distant,  did  not  reach  home 
till  7:30.  Supper  had  been  prepared  and  consisted  of  bread,  molasses, 
mush  and  coffee.  A  stiff  breeze  was  blowing  from  the  northwest  and 
the  cold  air  fairly  whistled  through  the  cracks  of  the  old  structure. 

'"Will  you  kindly  give  me  an  insight  into  your  daily  life,  Mr. 
Schrack  ? ' " 

"  '  Well,  to  tell  you  the  truth,  it  is  a  tough  one.  I  get  up  at  four 
o'clock  every  morning  and  leave  here  half  an  hour  later  in  order  to  reach 
the  works  at  six  o'clock.' " 

"  '  What  are  your  duties  ? ' " 

"  '  I  am  a  loader,  and  with  the  help  of  another  man  we  load  from 
sixty  to  seventy  cars  per  day.'  " 

"  '  What  are  you  getting  per  day  ? '  " 

"  '  Sixty-two  cents.' '' 

"  '  How  do  you  manage  to  live  with  that  amount?  '  " 

"  '  Oh,  we  manage  to  just  hang  together.  We  can't  afford  meat 
but  once  a  week.  Bread  and  molasses  constitute  our  chief  diet  with  a 
few  potatoes  and  corn  meal  thrown  in.'  " 

"  How  about  your  clothing,  shoes,  etc.  ?  '  " 

"  '  The  children  have  no  shoes  and  really  I  cannot  afford  to  buy  any 
for  them.'" 

"  '  How  much  did  you  earn  in  January? ' " 

"  '  $11.38.    £  made  a  little  over  eighteen  days,' " 

"  '  How  much  does  it  cost  you  to  live? ' " 

"  '  My  earnings  did  not  quite  cover  the  bills  and  the  grocer  told  me 
that  hereafter  none  of  the  men  would  be  allowed  to  exceed  their  earn- 
ings.    I  have  not  handled  a  cent  since  December  the  1st.'  " 

"  'How's that?'" 

"  '  Why,  you  see,  after  the  grocer  is  paid,  nothing  is  left.'" 

This  is  the  story  of  a  dozen  or  more,  and  with  the  exception  of  one 
or  two  cases  all  tell  the  same  story. 

Benville  Eck,  employed  as  foreman  in  the  mines  of  Kaufman  & 
Co.,  at  Alburtis,  said: 

"  I  have  been  employed  in  the  mines  over  twenty  years  and  get  $30 
per  month.  I  live  four  miles  from  here  and  generally  get  up  about 
four  o'clock  in  the  morning.  I  am  a  married  man  and  have  three 
children.  I  don't  know  how  the  men  live,  but  judging  from  what  I  see 
here,  bread  and  molasses  are  the  chief  articles  of  diet." 

Another  account,  recently  written  to  the  New  York 
World  by  a  correspondent  who  is  investigating  the  condi 


142  THE    PROTECTIVE    TAEIFF. 

tion  of  the  "  protected"  mine  workers  in  the  Pennsylvania 
coal  region  : 

Outside  of  "Japan  "  (a  name  given  a  miners'  settlement)  but  still  in 
JedOo,  I  came  to  another  tumbledown  collection  of  shanties.  In  the 
front  of  one  was  a  sad-faced  Welsh  woman  of  so  intelligent  a  countenance 
I  could  uot  forbear  to  question  her.  Her  husband,  she  said,  worked  as 
breaker  for  eighty  cents  a  day.  It  was  the  best  he  could  get.  I  entered 
the  house  and  was  struck  by  its  neatness.  The  woman  was  superior  to 
her  circumstances.  I  asked  to  see  a  ticket.  She  showed  me  one.  It 
represents  the  work  of  a  boy  of  ten,  one  of  fourteen  and  a  man. 

EARNINGS. 

By  boy  of  ten,  253  hours $17  45 

By  boy  of  fourteen,  236  hours , 18  56 

By  man,  249  hours 29  38 

Total  gross  earnings .$65  40 

CHARGES. 

To  balance  (debt) $61  40 

To  team 75 

To  rent  of  three  rooms 2  50 

To  coal 1  50 

$66  15 

Balance  (debt) , , . , 75 

To  merchandise 47  46 

Balance  (debt) $48  21 

"  So  you  are  heavily  in  debt,  I  see  ?  " 

"  Yes,  sir;  like  all  the  rest." 

"  You  have  a  hard  time  making  it  go." 

"  Oh,  sir,  I  couldn't  make  it  go  at  all  if  I  didn't  go  out  and  work 
myself.  All  the  money  we  can  see  is  what  I  bring  home.  No  thanks 
to  the  mines  for  that." 

"  Now,  I  would  like  to  ask,  gentlemen  operators,  if  this  is  right? 
You  make  a  father  work,  you  turn  his  sons  of  ten  and  fourteen  into 
treadmill  3laves,  and  then  compel  the  mother  to  go  outside  and  work  in 
order  to  eke  out  a  livelihood.  If  this  be  right  and  decent  in  your  minds, 
no  wonder  you  think  it  proper  to  enter  into  gigantic  conspiracies  to  put 
up  the  price  of  coal  aud  rob  the  poor  of  our  great'cities,  who  buy  by  the 
scuttlef  ul,  and  buy  perforce  when  fuel  is  at  its  dearest.    No  wonder  you 


OUR   PAUPER    LABOR.  143 

think  it  no  offense  to  defy  the  laws  of  Pennsylvania,  for  the  lesser 
offenses  are  swallowed  up  by  these  greater  ones." 

The  correspondent  thus  pathetically  continues : 

' '  I  supped  last  night  in  a  hovel  with  a  man  whom  we  may  call  John 
Richardson,  and  his  interesting  family.  There  were  nine  at  table,  six 
children,  ranging  from  Pat,  the  donkey-boy  of  fifteen,  to  Charlie,  the 
baby,  that  lay  asleep  in  his  mother's  lap,  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Richardson,  and 
myself,  a  self-invited  guest. 

"The  bill  of  fare  as  originally  planned  consisted  of  a  couple  of 
loaves  of  bread  from  the  '  pluck  me '  store  where  John  does  his  trading, 
compelled  so  to  do  if  he  would  get  work  in  the  mine  where  he  is 
employed,  some  salt  to  eat  upon  the  bread,  a  bit  of  salt  pork  for  the 
father  and  eldest  son,  some  huckleberries  and  red  raspberries  mixed, 
picked  by  the  little  girl,  a  small  libation  of  milk,  John  owning  an  interest 
in  a  cow,  and  some  tea,  composed,  as  near  as  I  could  judge,  of  one  part 
cheap  green  tea,  and  four  parts  sweet  fern,  or  some  other  herb  gathered 
near  by,  to  eke  out  a  warm  decoction.  To  this  bill  of  fare  I  added  a 
large  beefsteak  from  the  round,  a  couple  pounds  of  cheese,  together 
with  a  paper  of  sweet  crackers  for  the  little  ones.  If  you  could  have 
seen  the  way  these  unwonted  luxuries  were  reveled  in  by  the  whole 
Richardson  groupe,  I  am  sure  you  would  have  felt  the  warm  shivers 
run  up  and  down  your  backbone  as  they  ran  up  and  down  my  own. 

"  There  is  a  full  supply  of  so-called  '  Hunks  '  in  town.  This  is  the 
miner's  name  for  the  poor  creatures  who  are  brought  over  here  in  gangs 
from  Hungary,  Poland,  Austria,  Russia  and  Italy,  and  put  to  work  at 
wages  that  no  man  Avith  a  family  to  support  could  stand.  The  highest 
paid  them  is  ninety  cents  a  day.  They  work  for  what  they  can  get,  and 
herd  together  like  cattle,  twenty  and  thirty  in  a  single  building,  sleeping 
on  the  floor,  or  in  the  woods  when  the  weather  is  warm,  and  paying 
their  housekeeper  $4  per  week  for  their  board.  The  decent  laborers  of 
all  nationalities  are  upon  an  equal  footing  at  the  mines,  but  these  cattle 
are  outcasts,  and  deserve  to  be  so.  I  shall  devote  a  separate  letter  to  a 
description  of  these  creatures,  the  bane  of  the  mines,  which  will  be 
taken  from  life." 

The  Chicago  Herald  of  July  last  contributes  the  fol- 
lowing: 

"  Newspaper  correspondents  have  lately  achieved  the  difficult  task 
of  exploring  this  beautiful  region — meaning  the  collieries  of  Hazleton, 
Pa. — hitherto  so  severely  ignored  by  the  protectionist  hair-raisers. 
With  what  commiseration  for  poor  Ireland  and  benighted  free-trade  rid- 


144  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

den  England,  with  what  pride  in  the  institutions  of  the  land  of  his  birth, 
must  every  American  read  of  the  recent  evictions  at  Hazleton  collieries, 
near  Wilkes  Barrel" 

"For  brutality  and  consequent  misery  they  surpass  the  most  exag- 
gerated horror  yet  reported  from  Ireland." 

"  Hazleton  is  a  delightful  village  nestling  in  the  carboniferous  hills 
near  the  Hazel  Brook  mines.  Village  and  hills  and  collieries  are  the 
property  of  a  firm  named  J.  S.  Wentz  &  Co.  The  firm  will  not  sell  or 
lease  a  foot  of  land  to  anybody,  nor  allow  a  man  to  build  a  house  for 
himself.  It  compels  every  employe  in  the  mines  to  rent  from  it,  at  from 
$5  to  $6  a  month.  The  men  are  forced  to  .sign  a  lease  which  places 
them  absolutely  at  the  company's  mercy.  They  expressly  waive  every 
benefit  or  protection  which  they  might  have  under  the  laws  of  the  State. 
They  agree  that  the  moment  they  cease  work  for  the  company  they  must 
leave  their  homes,  and  can  be  ejected  on  ten  days'  notice;  and  they 
further  have  to  sign  what  is  termed  an  '  amicable  suit  of  ejectment,'  by 
which  the  company  can  at  any  moment  issue  a  writ  and  evict  them. 

"  This,  mind  you,  is  a  strictly  American  and  highly  protected  lease. 
Mark  how  it  operates:  Notices  to  quit  were  sent  round  to  the  strikers 
some  weeks  ago.  On  Saturday  Deputy  Sheriff  Brockway,  armed  with 
the  writs  issued  in  '  amicable  suit  of  ejectment,'  and  backed  by  a  body 
of  coal  and  iron  police  in  the  pay  of  the  company,  appeared  in  the  vil- 
lage and  began  to  evict.  Six  families  with  all  their  goods  and  chattels 
were  thrown  on  the  hillside;  they  were  the  families  of  Neal  Gallagher, 
Daniel  Nigan,  Patrick  Bowen,  Barney  Gallagher,  Joseph  McGonegal 
and  Patrick  Dunlavy.  Everything  the  house  contained  was  thrown 
pell-mell  out  of  doors  and  window,  the  women  and  children  driven  out 
and  the  doors  locked  behind  them.  From  their  names  it  is  apparent 
that  these  tenants  came  from  the  land  of  iron  leases  and  heartless  evic- 
tions, in  the  full  hope,  presumably,  of  finding  relief  in  the  land 
of  the  free.  Their  oppression  did  not  stop  here.  Not  only  were 
they  thus  deprived  of  home  and  shelter,  but  not  a  soul  in  the  village 
dared  shelter  them  or  their  goods.  The  company  had  given  notice 
that  any  tenant  affording  shelter  to  those  evicted  would  be  himself  dis- 
possessed. Mrs.  Dunlavy  was  sick  in  bed  when  the  officers  entered  the 
house,  but  she  had  to  go,  and  her  bed  was  put  outside  after  her.  It  was 
with  difficulty  that  she  obtained  permission  to  stop  over  night  at  a 
neighbor's,  nor  were  the  evicted  tenants  able  to  remove  their  goods,  for 
the  company  had  prohibited  any  wagon  from  entering  its  lands  for  that 
purpose,  and  refused  to  grant  the  use  of  its  own  teams.  Women  and 
children  were  compelled  to  hunt  miles  in  search  of  a  place  to  spend  the 


OUR    PAUPER    LABOR.  145 

night,  and  some  unable  to  obtain  shelter  were  forced  to  sleep  on  the 
bare  ground,  without  roof  to  cover  them.  Tbeir  goods  are  lying  to-day 
just  as  they  were  thrown  out,  the  people  being  unable  to  move  them. 

"It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  such  tilings  could  happen  without 
comment.  On  the  contrary,  the  whole  region  was  boiling  over  with 
indignation,  though  choking  its  impotent  wrath  through  fear  of  incur- 
ring the  horror  themselves,  for  everybody  thereabouts  belongs  to  Wentz 
&  (,'o.  Even  the  press  dared  not  make  mention  of  what  took  place. 
'  What  can  we  do  ? '  a  local  editor  demanded  of  the  correspondent.  '  The 
coal  kings  have  the  making  of  the  postmasters,  no  matter  which  party  is 
in  power.  If  any  paper  dares  to  open  its  mouth  about  these  outrages  the 
postmasters  get  the  wink  and  our  paper  is  kicked  upon  the  floor  —  its 
subscribers  look  in  vain  for  it.  One  paper  near  here,  at  Freeland,  has 
defied  the  autocrats  and  told  the  truth  about  them,  and  for  years  the 
editor  has  labored  on  the  verge  of  bankruptcy.  Oh,  I  tell  you  these 
men  are  above  the  law.  We  have  submitted  to  them,  and  not  until  the 
metropolitan  press  take  hold  of  the  matter  will  justice  ever  be  done  here. 

"  The  company  store  system  is,  of  course,  prevalent  in  this  region, 
and  not  the  least  of  the  links  in  the  chain  of  slavery  The  Stone  bill, 
passed  in  the  Pennsylvania  legislature  in  1884,  makes  this  system  illegal. 
But  what  of  that  ?  What  is  law  to  a  protected  coal  baron?  The  miners 
arc  now  compelled  to  trade  at  the  company's  stores,  but  if  they  don't  do 
so  —  well,  their  services  are  no  longer  required.  Then  there  is  a  doctor 
furnished  by  each  company,  and  each  miner  with  a  family  must  pay 
seventy-five  cents  a  month,  whether  sick  or  well,  while  each  single  man 
of  twenty-one  or  more  is  docked  fifty  cents  a  month  for  the  benefit  of 
this  pampered  physician.  Other  doctors  are  'not  allowed.'  Hundreds 
of  company  doctors  have  made  fortunes  out  of  the  business.  Then  each 
man  pays  fifty  cents  a  month  towards  the  support  of  a  priest,  but  this  is 
not  insisted  on.  Four  dollars  is  stopped  for  rent,  and  $1.90  for  coal, 
with  sixty-five  cents  added  for  delivery,  and  sometimes  taxes  are  added 
upon  the  dwelling.  Thus  it  results  that  the  men  very  rarely  draw  more 
than  $2  or  $3  in  money  at  the  end  of  the  month.  Their  slavery  is  com- 
plete. It  is  remarked  that,  under  these  conditions,  the  mining  popula- 
tion grows  sullen  and  dispirited;  that  the  young  men  flee  away  to  the 
cities  as  they  grow  up,  leaving  their  places  to  be  filled  by  cheap  Slav 
labor  imported  for  the  purpose;  that  the  young  women  take  to  a  life  of 
shame  rather  than  live  in  the  cursed  atmosphere  of  their  youth;  that  the 
children  are  jojdess  and  ignorant.  The  houses  are  horrible;  the  saloons 
are  better,  and  the  company  sells  the  liquor.  Men  take  to  dissipation 
from  sheer  despair.     A  strained,  unnatural  feeling  of  dread  pervades  the 


146  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

place,  for  every  one  knows  that  spies  are  about  and  be  dare  not  speak.' 
To  close  this  account  of  Pennsylvania  horrors  the  cor- 
roborative testimony  of  Mr.  John  Jarrett  is  now  offered, 
he  being  fully  posted  in  regard  to  the  wages  and  condi- 
tion of  the  miners.  Mr.  Jarrett  is  authority  in  matters  of 
protection  which  no  protectionist  will  dare  to  impeacn. 

On  the  6th  of  September,  1883,  at  a  meeting  of  the 
United  States  Senate  Committee  on  Labor  and  Capital  in 
the  city  of  New  York,Mr.  Jarrett  was  sworn  and  examined : 

"  Please  state  your  residence  and  occupation." 

' '  My  name  is  John  Jarrett.  I  reside  at  Sharon,  Pa.  At  present  I  am 
president  of  the  Amalgamated  Iron  and  Steel  Workers  of  the  United 
States." 

"  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  condition  of  the  Pennsylvania  coal- 
miners?  " 

"  I  do,  sir.  " 

'  How  many  do  you  think  there  are?  " 

"There  must  beat  least  ninety  thousand  coal-miners  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, of  whom  about  sixty  thousand  are  the  heads  of  families." 

"  The  men  who  mine  the  iron  and  coal?  " 

"Well,  coalmining  in  Pennsylvania,  in  my  opinion,  is  a  more 
important  interest  than  ore-mining,  and  the  condition  of  the  coal-miners 
in  Pennsylvania  is  pitiable,  miserable  in  the  extreme." 

"  You  say  their  condition  is  pitiable  and  miserable.  How  much  so 
isil?" 

"  It  is  because  the  wages  of  coal-miners  are  too  low.  They  are  illy 
paid.  Then,  too,  they  suffer  from  the  truck  system.  Under  that  system 
they  pay  one  hundred  per  cent  more  for  what  they  buy  than  our  people 
do.  Then,  the  "nouses  they  live  in  are  extremely  miserable.  If  I  feel 
particularly  for  any  branch  of  labor  in  this  country  jt  is  for  the  poor 
coal-miner.  He  risks  his  life  day  after  day  for  a  mere  pittance.  Every 
time  he  departs  from  the  light  of  day  he  does  not  know  whether  he  will 
ever  see  it  again.  And  while  in  some  branches  it  does  not  require  much 
skill  to  be  a  miner,  in  others  it  does,  and  I  think  the  coal-miner  ought  to 
be  better  paid,  better  clothed,  better  housed  and  better  fed  than  he  is." 

"  Have  you  been  among  the  English  miners? " 

"Yes,  sir;  and  from  my  experience  among  the  miners  in  England  I 
may  say  that  they  are  really  better  cared  for  than  are  the  coal-miners  in 
the  United  States," 


OUR   PAUPEK   LAEOE.  147 

"  Do  you  mean  that  they  have  more  comfort  during  the  year." 
"Yes,  sir.     Then  the  truck  system  has  heen  entirely  wiped  out  there 
the  men  are  getting  their  money  every  week." 

Mr.  Jarrett,  it  will  be  seen,  admits  under  oath  that  from 
personal  experience  the  "  pauper  labor  "  in  the  coal  mines 
of  free-trade  England  is  better  cared  for  and  has  more 
comfort  during  the  year ;  in  short,  that  their  condition  is 
more  prosperous  than  that  of  their  brethren  in  "  protec- 
tion-blessed"  Pennsylvania.  "  Sixty  thousand  heads  of 
families,"  he  says,  "to  whom  probably  two  hundred  thou- 
sand women  and  children  are  looking  for  support,  are  in  a 
pitiable,  miserable  condition,  poorly  paid,  poorly  clad, 
poorly  fed  and  poorly  housed." 

The  following  testimony  before  the  United  States 
Senate  Committee  of  a  "protected"  workman  in 
one  of  the  cotton-mills  in  ISTew  England  is  highly  inter- 
esting and  instructive.  It  is  the  tragic  history  of  the  daily 
life  of  a  class  of  "  American  "  labor,  of  which  no  parallel 
can  be  found  in  free-trade  England. 

Thomas  O'Donnell,  a  mule-spinner,  at  Fall  Kiver,  Mass.: 
"  I  have  a  wife  and  two  children.  I  went  to  work  when  I  was 
young  and  have  been  working  ever  since  in  the  cotton  business.  I  earn 
$1.50  a  day.  I  pay  $1.50  a  week  for  rent.  I  have  not  worked  more 
thau  half  the  time  since  the  great  strike  three  years  ago.  If  a  man  has 
not  a  boy  to  act  as  back-boy,  in  a  great  many  cases  they  discharge  a 
man  and  put  in  men  who  have  boys  capable  enough  to  work  in  a  mill 
and  earn  thirty  or  forty  cents  a  day.  And  another  thing  that  helped  to 
keep  me  down:  a  year  ago  this  month  I  buried  the  oldest  boy  we  had, 
and  that  brings  things  very  expensive  on  a  poor  man.  For  instance,  it 
will  cost  here,  to  bury  a  body,  about  $100.  Now,  we  could  have  that 
done  in  England  for  about  £5.  That  would  not  amount  to  much  more 
than  about  $20,  or  something  in  that  neighborhood.  That  makes  a 
good  deal  of  difference.  Doctor's  bills  are  very  heavy,  about  $2  a  visit, 
and  if  a  doctor  comes  once  a  day  for  two  or  three  weeks  it  is  quite  a  pile 
for  a  poor  man  to  pay." 

"  They  charge  you  as  much  as  they  charge  people  of  more  means?  " 
"They  charge  as  much  as  if  I  was  the  richest  man  in  the  city 


148  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

except  that  some  of  them  might  be  generous  once  in  a  -while  and  put  it 
down  a  little  at  the  end;  but  the  charge  generally  is  $2.  That  makes  it 
hard.  I  have  a  brother  who  has  four  children,  besides  his  wife  and  him 
self.  All  he  earns  is  $1.50  a  day.  He  works  in  the  iron  works  at  Fall 
River.  He  only  works  about  nine  months  out  of  the  twelve.  There  is 
generally  about  three  months  of  stoppage,  taking  the  year  right  through, 
and  his  wife  and  family  all  have  to  be  supported  for  a  year  out  of  the 
wages  of  nine  months — $1.50  a  day  for  nine  months  out  of  the  twelve  to 
support  six  of  them.  It  does  not  stand  to  reason  that  these  children 
and  he  himself  can  have  natural  food  or  be  naturally  dressed.  His 
children  are  often  sick,  and  he  has  to  call  in  doctors.  That  is  always 
hanging  over  him,  and  is  a  great  expense  to  him;  and,  then,  if  he 
does  not  pay  the  bill,  the  trustee  law  comes  on  him.  That  is  a  thing 
that  is  not  properly  looked  after.  A  man  told  me  the  other  day  that  he 
was  trusteed  for  $1.75,  and  I  understood  that  there  was  a  law  in  this 
State  that  a  man  could  not  be  trusteed  for  less  than  $10.  It  seems  to  me 
there  is  something  wrong  in  the  government  somewhere — where  it  is, 
I  can't  tell." 

'  How  much  money  have  you  saved?" 

"I  have  not  a  cent  in  the  house;  didn't  have  when  I  came  out  this 
morning." 

"  How  much  money  have  you  had  within  three  months?  " 

"  I  have  had  about  $16  inside  of  three  months." 

"  How  much  have  you  had  within  a  }rear?  " 

"  Since  Thanksgiving  I  happened  to  get  work  in  the  Crescent  mill, 
and  worked  there  exactly  thirteen  weeks.  I  got  just  $1.50  a  day,with  the 
exception  of  a  few  days  that  I  lost,  because  in  following  mule-spinning 
you  are  obliged  to  lose  a  day  once  in  a  while;  you  can't  follow  it  up 
regularly." 

"  Thirteen  weeks  would  be  seventy-eight  days,  and,  at  $1.50  ad?y, 
that  would  make  $117,  less  whatever  time  you  lost?  " 

"Yes;  I  worked  thirteen  weeks  there  and  ten  days  in  another 
place,  and  then  there  was  a  dollar  I  got  this  week,  "Wednesday." 

"  Taking  a  full  year  back  can  you  tell  how  much  you  have  had? " 

"  That  would  be  about  fifteen  weeks'  work.  Last  winter,  as  I  told 
you,  I  got  in  and  worked  up  to  somewhere  around  Fast  Day,  or  may  be 
New  Year's  Day;  anyway,  Mr.  Howard  has  it  down  on  his  record,  if 
you  wish  to  have  an  exact  answer  to  that  question;  he  can  answer  it 
better  than  I  can,  because  we  have  a  sort  of  union  there  to  keep  our- 
selves together." 

"  Do  you  think  you  have  got  $150  within  a  year?  " 


OUK   PAUPEK    LABOR.  149 

"Well,  I  could  figure  it  up  if  I  had  time.  The  thirteen  weeks  is 
all  I  have  had." 

"  That  would  be  somewhere  about  $133,  if  you  had  not  lost  any- 
time? That  is  all  you  have  had  to  support  yourself  and  wife  and  two 
children?" 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"Have  you  had  any  help  from  outside? " 

"No  sir.", 

"  Do  you  mean  that  yourself  and  wife  and  two  children  have  had 
nothing  but  that  for  that  time?  " 

"  That  is  all.  I  got  a  couple  of  dollars'  worth  of  coal  last  winter 
and  the  wood  picked  up  by  myself.  I  go  around  with  a  shovel  and  pick 
up  clams  and  wood  to  help  out." 

"  What  do  you  do  with  the  clams?  " 

"We)  eat  them.  I  don't  get  them  to  sell,  but  just  to  eat  for  the 
family.  That  is  the  way  my  brother  lives  too,  mostly.  He  lives  close 
by  us." 

"  How  many  live  in  that  way  down  there?  " 

"  I  could  not  count  them  they  are  so  numerous.  I  suppose  there 
are  one  thousand  down  there." 

"  A  thousand  that  live  on  $150  a  year? '' 

"They live  on  less." 

"  How  long  has  that  been  so?  " 

"  Six  years  this  month." 

"  Why  do  you  not  go  west  on  a  farm?  " 

"  How  could  I  go  ?    Walk  it  ?  " 

"  Well,  I  want  to  know  why  you  do  not  go  out  west  on  a  $2,000 
farm,  or  take  up  a  homestead  and  break  it  and  work  it  up,  and  then 
have  it  for  yourself  and  family?  " 

"  I  can't  see  how  I  could  go  out  west  if  I  have  nothing  to  go  with." 

"  It  would  not  cost  you  over  $1,500?  " 

"  Well,  I  never  see  over  a  $20  bill,  and  that  is  when  I  have  been 
getting  a  month's  pay  at  once.  If  some  one  would  give  me  $1,500  I 
will  go." 

"  Is  there  any  prospect  that  any  one  will  do  that?  " 

"  I  don't  know  of  anybody  that  would." 

"  You  say  you  think  there  are  a  thousand  men  or  so  with  families 
that  live  in  that  way  in  Fall  River? " 

"  Yes,  sir;  and  I  know  many  of  them.  They  are  around  there  by 
the  shore.     You  can  see  them  every  day." 

"  Are  you  a  good  workman?  " 

"Yes,  sir." 


150  THE   PEOTECTIYE   TAEIFF. 

"  Were  you  ever  turned  off  because  of  misconduct,  incapacity  or 
unfitness  for  work?  " 

"  No,  sir." 

"  Or  because  you  made  any  trouble  among  the  help?" 

"No,  sir." 

"  What  would  you  work  for  if  you  could  get  work  right  along?  " 

"  Well,  if  I  was  where  my  family  could  be  with  me  and  I  could 
have  work  every  day  I  would  take  $1.50  a  day  and  be  glad.  I  would 
not  have  to  pick  up  clams.  I  have  had  no  coal,  except  one  dollar's 
worth,  since  Christmas." 

"  When  do  the  clams  give  out?  " 

"They  give  out  in  winter." 

' '  What  do  you  have  for  fuel  ?  " 

"  Wood  or  coal." 

•'  Where  does  the  wood  come  from?  " 

"  I  pick  it  up  along  the  shore.  Any  old  pieces  around  that  are  not 
good  for  anything.     There  are  many  more  that  do  the  same  thing." 

"  Do  you  get  meat  to  live  on  much? " 

"  Very  seldom." 

"  What  kind  of  meat  do  you  get  for  your  family?  " 

"  Well,  once  in  awhile  we  get  a  piece  of  pork  and  some  clams  and 
make  a  clam-chowder.  We  sometimes  get  a  piece  of  corned-beef,  as 
some  of  us  like  that." 

"Have  you  had  any  fresh  beef  within  a  month? " 

"  Yes,  we  had  a  piece  of  porksteak  for  four  of  us  yesterday." 

"Have  you  had  any  beef  within  a  month?" 

"  No,  sir.  I  was  invited  to  a  man's  house  on  Sunday;  he  wanted 
me  to  go  up  to  his  house  and  we  had  a  dinner  of  roast  pork." 

"That  was  an  invitation  out;  but  I  mean,  have  you  had  any  beef- 
steak in  your  own  family,  of  your  own  purchase,  within  a  month?  " 

"  Yes,  there  was  a  half  pound,  ora  pound  on  Sunday." 

"  And  there  were  four  of  you  in  the  family?" 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"  How  -many  pounds  of  beefsteak  have  you  had  in  your  family 
within  this  year?" 

"  I  don't  think  there  has  been  five  pounds  of  beefsteak  in  a  whole 
year?" 

"  You  have  had  a  little  porksteak?" 

"  We  had  a  half  pound  of  porksteak  yesterday;  I  don't  know  when 
we  had  any  before." 

"  What  other  kind  of  meat  have  you  had  during  the  year?  " 


OUR  PAUPER   TARIFF.  151 

"  Well,  we  have  had  corned  beef  on  Sundays  for  dinner,  and  some 
cabbage;  that's  all  I  can  remember  of." 

"  What  have  you  eaten?  " 

"  Well,  bread,  mostly,  when  we  could  get  it;  we  sometimes  couldn't 
make  out  to  get  that,  and  have  had  to  go  to  bed  without  a  meal." 

' '  Has  there  been  any  day  in  the  year  that  you  have  had  to  go  with 
out  anything  to  eat?" 

"Yes,  sir,  several  days." 

"  More  than  one  day  at  a  time?  " 

"  No,  sir." 

"  How  about  the  children  and  your  wife;  did  they  go  without  any- 
thing to  eat  too?" 

"My  wife  went  out  this  morning  and  went  to  a  neighbor's  house 
and  got  a  loaf  of  bread  and  fetched  it  home,  and  when  she  got  home  the 
children  were  crying  for  something  to  eat." 

"  Have  the  children  had  anything  to  eat  today  except  that,  do  you 
think?" 

"  They  had  that  loaf  of  bread;  I  don't  know  what  they  have  had 
since  then,  if  they  have  had  anything." 

"Bid  you  leave  any  money  at  home?" 

"No,  sir." 

"If  that  loaf  is  gone,  is  there  anything  in  the  house?" 

"  No,  sir,  unless  my  wife  goes  out  and  gets  something;  and  I  don't 
know  who  would  mind  the  children  while  she  goes  out." 

"  Has  she  any  money  to  get  anything  with?" 

"  No,  sir." 

"Have  the  children  gone  without  a  meal  at  anytime  during  the 
year?" 

"  They  have  gone  without  bread  some  days,  but  we  have  sometimes 
got  meal  and  made  porridge  of  it." 

"  What  have  the  children  got  in  the  way  of  clothing?" 

"  They  have  got  along  very  nicely  all  summer,  but  now  they  are 
beginning  to  feel  quite  sickly.  One  has  one  shoe  on,  a  very  poor  one, 
and  a  slipper  that  was  picked  up  somewhere.  The  other  has  two  odd 
shoes  on,  with  the  heel  out.     He  has  got  cold  and  is  sickly  now." 

"  Have  they  any  stockings?" 

"He  had  two  stockings,  but  his  feet  comes  through  them,  for  ther" 
is  a  hole  in  the  bottom  of  his  shoe." 

"  What  have  they  on  the  rest  of  their  person?" 

"  Well,  they  have  a  little  calico  shirt;  what  should  be  a  shirt;  it  is 


152  THE   PROTECTIVE   TAEIFF. 

sewed  up  in  some  shape,  and  one  little  petticoat,  and  a  kind  of  a  little 
dress." 

"  How  many  dresses  has  your  wife?" 

"  She  has  had  one  since  she  was  married,  and  she  hasn't  worn  that 
more  than  half  a  dozen  times;  she  has  worn  it  just  going  to  church,  hut 
when  she  comes  back  she  takes  it  off,  and  it  is  pretty  near  as  good  as 
when  she  bought  it." 

"  She  keeps  that  dress  to  go  to  church  in?" 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"  How  many  dresses  aside  from  that  has  she?" 

"  Well,  she  got  one  three  months  ago." 

"  What  did  it  cost?" 

'  It  cost  $1  to  make  it,  and  I  guess  about  $1  for  the  stuff,  as  near 
as  I  can  tell." 

"What  else  has  she?" 

"  Well,  she  has  an  undershirt  that  she  got  given  to  her,  and  she  has 
an  old  wrapper  which  is  about  a  mile  too  big  for  her;  somebody  gave  it  to 
her." 

"  Have  you  had  $1  or  $2  worth  of  coal  for  the  winter?" 

"I  think  it  was  a  quarter  of  a  ton  last  winter;  I  believe  it  was  $2.25 
worth." 

"  You  say  that  a  good  many  others  are  situated  just  like  yourself?" 

:'  Yes,  sir;  I  should  say  as  many  as  a  thousand  down  in  Fall  River 
are  just  in  the  same  shape,  if  not  worse;  though  they  can't  be  much 
worse.  I  have  heard  many  women  say  they  would  sooner  be  dead  than 
living.  I  don't  know  what  is  wrong,  but  something  is  wrong,  There 
is  an  overflow  of  labor  in  Fall  River,  I  guess." 

"  Why  do  not  these  people  go  out  west  upon  farms  and  go  to  farm- 
ing?" 

"They  have  not  the  means.  Fall  River  being  a  manufacturing 
place,  it  brings  them  there;  and  when  the  mills  in  other  places  stop  for 
want  of  water,  that  brings  them  to  Fall  River.  I  think  there  are  quite 
a  lot  of  them  from  Lowell  and  Lawrence." 

"  Is  there  anything  else  that  you  want  to  say  to  the  committee?" 

"  Well,  as  regards  debts;  it  costs  us  so  much  for  funeral  expenses 
and  doctor's  expenses;  I  wanted  to  mention  that." 

"You  have  stated  that.  It  is  clear  that  nobody  can  afford  either 
to  get  sick  or  die  there." 

"Well,  there  are  plenty  of  them  down  there  that  are  in  poor  health, 
but  I  am  in  good  health  and  my  children  generally  are  in  fair  health,  but 


OUR  PAUPER  LABOR.  153 

the  children  can't  pick  up  anything  and  only  get  what  I  bring  to  them." 

"Are  you  in  debt?" 

"  Yes,  sir." 

"  How  much?" 

"  I  am  in  debt  for  $15  of  those  funeral  expenses  since  a  year  ago." 

"  You  live  in  a  hired  tenement?" 

"Yes;  but,  of  course,  I  can't  pay  a  big  rent.  My  rent  is  $6  a 
month.  The  man  I  am  living  under  would  come  and  put  me  right  out, 
and  give  me  no  notice  whatever,  if  I  didn't  pay  my  rent.  He  is  a  sheriff 
and  auctioneer  man.  I  don't  know  whether  he  has  any  authority  to  do 
it  or  not,  but  he  does  it  with  people." 

"  Do  you  see  any  way  out  of  your  trouble;  what  are  you  going  to 
do  for  a  living,  or  do  you  expect  to  stay  right  there?" 

"Yes,  I  can't  run  around  with  my  family." 

"  You  have  nowhere  to  go  to,  and  no  way  of  getting  there  if  there 
was  any  place  to  go  to?" 

"No,  sir;  I  have  no  means  nor  anything,  so  I  am  obliged  to  stay 
there  and  try  and  pick  up  anything  as  I  can."  

"  You  don't  know  anything  but  mule-spinning,  I  suppose?" 

"  That  is  what  I  have  been  doing,  but  sometimes  I  do  something 
with  pick  and  shovel.  I  have  worked  for  a  man  at  that,  because  I  am 
so  hard  put.  The  way  they  do  there  is  this:  There  are  about  twelve  or 
thirteen  men  that  go  into  a  mill  every  morning,  and  they  have  to  stand 
their  chance  looking  for  work.  The  man  who  has  a  boy  with  him,  he 
stands  the  best  chance;  then  if  it  is  my  turn  or  a  neighbor's  turn  who 
has  no  boy,  if  another  man  comes  in  who  has  a  boy,  he  is  taken  right  in, 
and  we  are  left  out.  I  said  to  the  boss  once:  '  It  is  my  turn  to  go  in,  and 
now  you  have  taken  on  that  man;  what  am  I  to  do?  I  have  got  two 
little  boys  at  home,  one  of  them  three  and  a  half  years,  and  the  other  one 
a  year  and  a  half  old,  and  how  am  I  to  rind  something  for  them  to  eat? 
I  can't  get  my  turn  when  I  come  here.'  He  said  he  could  do  nothing  for 
me.  I  says,  '  Have  I  got  to  starve?  Ain't  I  to  have  any  work?'  They 
are  forcing  these  young  boys  into  the  mills  that  should  not  be  in  the  mills 
at  all ;  forcing  them  in  because  they  are  throwing  the  mules  out  and  put- 
ting on  frame  rings.  They  are  doing  everything  of  that  kind  that  they 
possibly  can  to  crush  down  the  poor  people,  the  poor  operatives  there." 

The  New  York  World,  which  has  given  to  the  sul  ject  of  "pauper 
labor"  special  attention,  thus  describes  the  condition  of  the  poor  girls 
employed  in  one  of  the  highly  protected  silk  ribbon  factories  of  that  city: 

Amid  the  busy  hum  and  whirl  of  a  hundred  looms  some  four  times 
that  number  of  girls  were  plying  their  deft  ringers. 


154  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

The  employes  of  the  factory  numbered  550,  and  with  the  exception 
of  the  weavers  at  the  looms  and  the  foreman  and  packers,  all  were 
women  and  girls.  The  majority  were  girls  of  from  thirteen  to  eighteen 
years  of  age,  the  older  girls  and  the  women  of  course  doing  the  more 
important  work.  The  girls  and  women  were,  without  exception,  spot- 
lessly clean  and  neat. 

A  few  questions  put  to  the  proprietor  of  the  factory  brought  out  the 
cold,  hard  facts  that  the  working  hours  for  the  girls  and  women  were 
from  seven  o'clock  till  six,  winter  and  summer  alike,  and  their  wages 
from  $3  to  $7  a  week. 

The  rest  might  have  been  conjectured,  but  the  reporter  seized  a 
moment  when  one  of  the  warping  machines  was  quiet  and  approached 
the  girl  in  charge,  a  little  damsel  of  apparently  sixteen  or  seventeen 
years. 

"  I  get  $3  a  week,"  she  said.  "  I  had  to  work  three  weeks  here  for 
$1  a  week.  It  took  me  that  long  to  know  how  to  watch  the  spools. 
Then  they  gave  me  $2.50,  and  last  month  they  raised  me  fifty  cents. 

' '  I  have  a  sister  two  years  older  than  myself .  She  works  in  a  paper- 
box  factory,  and  cannot  earn  more  than  $2.50  a  week.  Our  mother 
goes  out  washing,  and  the  three  of  us  together  earn  enough  to  keep  us. 

"This  work  is  not  very  hard,  but  I  have  to  get  up  at  half-past  five 
o'clock  in  the  morning.  It's  quite  dark  now  when  we  get  to  work.  We 
have  a  Saturday  half-holiday,  but  we  get  paid  50  cents  less  every  week 
than  if  we  had  to  work  that  afternoon. 

' '  I  shall  be  eighteen  years  next  birthday.  No,  of  course  I  should 
not  be  able  to'  live  on  my  earnings  if  I  were  alone.  It's  only  by  living 
with  my  sister  and  mother  that  we  can  get  along;  but  I  shall  get  a  raise 
to  $3.50  next  week,  and  if  I  get  on  they  will  give  me  better  work  and 
$5  a  week  soon." 

To  close  this  unattractive  chapter  on  the  life  of  our 
wage  workers  the  following  on  the  highly  protected 
"  labor "  in  some  of  the  great  industries  of  New  York 
city,  drawn  by  the  New  York  Herald,  is  added  : 

"  The  gulf  that  separates  the  custom  workman  from  the  unfortu- 
nates who  make  up  ready-made  clothing  seems  all  but  immeasurable. 

"  Not  in  pleasant  homes  nor  in  comfortable  workrooms  are  the  lat- 
ter to  be  found,  but  in  dingy,  foul-smelling  rear  houses,  in  moldy  cel- 
lars, iu  crumbling  garrets  or  in  the  noisome,  cramped  and  crowded 
rooms  of  those  traps  —  the  tenement  houses  of  New  York,  where  men 


OUR   PAUPEK   LABOR.  155 

women  and  children  are  huddled  together  at  the  rate  of  over  two  hun- 
dred thousand  to  the  square  mile;  where  hope  perishes  and  where  it 
seems  impossible  to  live,  much  less  to  work. 

"  Here  their  lives  are  passed,  forever  engaged  in  a  fierce  struggle 
with  want.  Slaves  of  poverty,  bound  with  fetters  they  cannot  break, 
held  fast  in  the  iron  grip  of  circumstances,  they  toil  on  instinctively 
until  the  release  comes. 

' '  The  average  earnings  of  men  and  women  do  not  exceed  $6  a  week 
the  year  round,  and  for  this  miserable  pittance  they  must  labor  from 
twelve  to  sixteen  hours  a  day  throughout  the  busy  season.  Then  come 
the  three  idle  months  during  which  they  live — well,  as  best  they  can, 
for  they  have  no  surplus  from  nine  months'  work,  their  earnings  tben 
being  barely  sufficient  to  keep  body  and  soul  together.  Through  the 
streets  of  the  city  they  plod,  looking  for  work,  and  in  their  wretched, 
cheerless  houses  they  rest,  waiting  for  work." 

Now  talk  about  "  pauper  labor  in  Europe ! "  Talk 
about  the  high  tariff  being  the  only  barrier  against  the 
reduction  of  the  wages  of  the  American  workingmen  to 
the  basis  of  the  starvation  wages  of  England !  Talk 
about  the  "  blessing  "  of  protecting  American  labor  against 
the  competition  of  foreign  paupers ! 

To  "protect,"  so  it  is  alleged,  American  tailors  and  to 
raise  their  wages,  there  is  a  duty  of  forty  per  cent  levied 
on  ready-made  clothes  imported  from  abroad,  or  forty 
cents  on  every  dollar's  worth  of  goods,  or  $4  on  each 
$10  worth.  Now  how  much  of  this  does  the  American 
tailor  get?  Not  a  penny  —  not  a  farthing.  His  wages 
are  shown  to  be  about  the  same  as  those  paid  in  London, 
while  in  fact  his  living  is  more  expensive.  The  American 
manufacturer,  having  squeezed  down  his  wages  to  the 
"pauper  labor"  basis,  levies  and  collects  from  the  people 
of  this  country  a  tax  of  forty  cents  on  each  dollar's  worth 
of  ready-made  clothing,  and  for  the  most  part  shoddy  and 
worthless  clothing  at  that,  and  pockets  it. 

But,  perhaps,  the  worst  picture  and  the  most  striking 
refutation  of  the  claim   that  protection  secures  to  the 


150  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

laborer  steady  work  at  good  wages,  is  shown  by  the  fol- 
lowing, taken  from  the  same  journal: 

"  The  condition  of  the  laborers  in  1  he  sugar  refineries  is  literally 
that  of  'white  slaves.'  The  lowness  of  their  wages  is  by  no  means 
the  sum  of  their  hardships.  In  no  occupation  is  the  toil  more  exhaust- 
ing, in  none  so  oppressive,  in  none  more  beset  with  menace  to  the  health, 
or  even  to  life  and  limb. 

"  There  are  rooms  in  a  sugar  refinery  where  the  temperature  is  kept 
at  180°  year  in  and  year  out.  Of  course  that  is  nothing  in  the  hottest 
chamber  of  the  Turkish  bath.  But  you  would  think  it  was  something 
if  you  had  to  endure  it  day  after  day  or  night  after  night,  from  ten  to 
twelve  hours  at  a  time,  and  not  only  to  endure  it  but  to  earn  your  daily 
bread  by  toiling  in  this  horrible  heat. 

"  The  average  wages  is  $30  a  month  to  a  man. 

'  Thirty  dollars  a  month !  And  nearly  all  of  them  are  men  of 
family,  men  with  wives  to  render  happy  and  with  children  to  clothe  and 
to  bring  up  in  ways  of  decency  and  intelligence. 

"  Since  the  last  strike  the  wages  of  the  sugar  refiners  have  been  a 
trifle,  only  a  trifle,  better  than  they  were  before.  They  are  now  four- 
teen and  a  half  cents  an  hour.  Think  of  that,  when  the  meanest  'long- 
shoreman gets  sixty  cents  an  hour  and  the  commonest  hod-carrier  $l..r;0 
a  day.  And  the  sugar  refiner  obtains  no  difference  of  wages  whether 
he  work  day  or  night,  while  the  'longshoreman's  night  pay  is  a  good 
deal  more  than  he  receives  for  day  labor. 

' '  Before  the  strike  the  men  in  larger  refineries  were  paid  only  thirteen 
and  a  half  cents  an  hour  and  those  in  some  of  the  smaller  onet  but 
twelve  and  a  half  cents." 

An   Englishman   who   had    quit   the   business,  wlien 

asked  concerning  the   comparative  condition  between  the 

sugar  refineries  in  this  country  and  in  England,  said : 

"  If  I  were  to  work  in  a  sugar  refinery  again  I  would  much  prefer 
to  do  so  in  England.  You  can  live  better  there  on  the  wages  which 
they  give  you  than  you  can  here.  Twenty-two  shillings  a  week  amounts 
to  eighty-eight  cents  for  each  working  day.  Mind  you,  you  have 
regularemployment  there,  too,  the  year  round.  Here,  if  you  were  sure 
of  the  fourteen  and  a  half  cents  an  hour,  miserable  pay  as  it  is  in  com- 
parison with  that  of  other  occupations,  it  would  be  something  worth 
striving  for  to  men  in  our  poor  condition.  It  is  just  there  where  the 
shoe  pinches  at  the  present  time.     The  'bosses'  are  bent  upon  getting 


OUR   PAUPER    LABOR. 


157 


their  own  prices  for  sugar  and  are  cutting  down  the  production.  They 
don't  care  a  rap  how  much  it  affects  the  poor  workingrnen.  You  have 
been  told  that  one  half  of  the  journeymen  sugar  refiners  were  idle 
Worse  than  this.  Many  of  those  who  are  not  idle  are  not  allowed  to 
work  half  their  time.  Some  of  them  get  only  three,  four,  or  five  hours 
at  a  time.  How  far  will  that  amount  of  labor  go  toward  supporting  a 
man,  think  you,  let  alone  a  wife  and  family?  Why,  there  are  poor 
fellows  whom  I  know,  married  at  that,  who  have  not  managed  to  make 
more  than  $20  or  $25  a  month  for  many  months  past.  The  average  I 
should  say,  is  about  $30  per  month.  There  are  some,  of  course,  who 
are  old  workmen  and  who  stand  best  with  the  '  bosses'  who  make  from 
$39  to  $44  a  month.  But  isn't  it  monstrous  that  that  should  be  the 
highest  wages  to  which  a  good  man  may  attain  after  years  of  hard  toil 
and  faithful  service? 

"What  the  men  complain  of  most,  however,  is  the  lack  of  work. 
And  they  would  be  a  great  deal  more  cheerful  if  they  even  got  paid  for 
all  the  time  that  they  devote  to  the  service  of  their  employers.  It's  a 
regular  thing  for  a  man  to  be  '  docked  '  for  a  quarter  of  an  hour  at  the 
end  or  in  the  middle  of  his  day.  The  men  are  asked  to  be  at  the  refinery 
at  certain  hours.  What  can  they  do  with  these  little  fag  ends  of  hours 
that  are  left  them  when  the  foreman  bids  them  go  for  the  day? 

"Think  of  '  docking  '  these  poor  fellows  who  make  only  fourteen 
and  a  half  cents  an  hour,  three  and  five-eights  cents  for  fifteen  minutes 
not  employed?  I  left  the  business  because  I  don't  think  that  any  man 
who  calls  himself  a  man  should  be  content  with  fourteen  and  a  half 
cents  an  hour. 

The  foregoing  are  only  isolated  cases,  but  they  are 
sufficient  to  convey  a  general  idea  of  the  deplorable  con- 
dition of  the  working  people  in  our  most  highly  protected 
industries.  The  reports  of  special  newspaper  corre- 
spondents, and  the  sworn  statement  of  these  intelligent 
operatives  simply  corroborate  the  numerous  reports  which 
have  almost  daily  been  published  during  the  last  ten 
years ;  and  the  fact  that  such  cases  of  destitution  and 
misery  as  the  above  are  never  heard  of  among  the  un- 
protected farmers,  and  but  few  among  the  other  laborers 
employed  in  unprotected  trades   and  occupations,  must 


158  THE   PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

convince  every  reflecting  mind  that  protection  is  not  a 
blessing  but  is  the  curse  of  American  labor. 

Moreover  these  damaging  facts  to  the  claims  of  pro- 
tectionists have  never  been  denied  and,  indeed,  cannot  be 
denied.  These  people  are  the  living  monuments  of  the 
heartlessness  and  cupidity  of  a  privileged  class.  Suppose 
their  assertions  were  admitted,  that  the  workers  in  Eng- 
land are  in  a  worse  condition  than  ours,  is  there  not  a 
world-wide  difference  between  the  natural  conditions  of 
the  two  countries  to  account  for  it  ?  England  is  a  small, 
overpopulated  island,  with  iron  and  coal  as  her  only 
natural  resources. 

America  is  a  land  immense  in  extent,  sparsely  settled, 
endowed  with  natural  wealth  and  advantages  unsur- 
passed by  any  other  country  on  the  globe.  In  making 
invidious  comparisons  betweeu  the  condition  of  the  work- 
ers in  both,  the  protectionists  are  adding  insult  to  injury. 
Such  pictures  of  human  misery  and  wretchedness  as  the 
above  should  not  be  among  the  possibilities  in  America. 
There  are  many  reasons  why  affluence  and  comfort  should 
be  the  exceptions  among  the  working  classes  of  England, 
while  there  is  absolutely  no  excuse  why  in  the  United 
States  plenty  should  not  be  the  rule. 

And  what  is  the  principal  cause  of  this  anomaly  %  It 
is  not  so  much  insufficiency  of  wages  as  insufficiency  of 
work. 

The  Fall  River  "  clam-picker  "  stated  the  question  most 
tersely  when  he  said :  "I  would  be  perfectly  satisfied 
with  $1.50  a  day,  if  I  had  work  all  through  the  year." 
And  why  this  lack  of  work  ?  England  is  selling  five  hun- 
dred yards  of  woolen  and  cotton  fabrics  to  foreign 
nations  where  we  sell  but  twenty,  and  all  other  manu- 
factured articles  in  proportion. 


OUR    PAUPER    LABOR.  159 

Is  the  Englishman  such  a  superior  business  man?  Has 
he  more  good  sense ;  has  he  greater  spirit  of  enterprise  ? 
Are  the  managers  of  his  mills  more  efficient  and  invent- 
ive than  ours?  No;  but  instead  of  confining  his  trade 
within  England's  realm,  and  instead  of  insisting  on  cash 
sales,  he  trades  everywhere  at  a  profit.  He  trades  his 
cotton  goods  and  miscellaneous  wares  at  a  profit  with  the 
merchant  of  Peru  for  copper.  He  trades  his  cutlery  and 
dry  goods  in  Buenos  Ayres  for  the  hides,  tallow  and  wool  of 
the  Argentine  Eepublic.  He  gives  steady  work  to  thou- 
sands of  laborers  in  manufacturing  his  copper  into  utensils, 
and  the  Argentine  hides  into  leather,  which  he  then  trades 
at  a  profit  with  the  Frenchman  for  wines,  silk  and  jewelry 
which  he  sells  at  a  profit  at  home,  and  the  wool  he  sells 
at  a  profit  for  cash,  or  trades  for  agricultural  produce  in 
New  York ;  proceeds  ta  New  Orleans  and  buys  cotton  at 
the  same  figure  his  Yankee  competitor  buys  it  for,  takes  it 
home,  setting  his  countless  operatives  to  work  it  up  into 
fabrics  for  the  markets  of  the  United  States  and  the 
rest  of  the  world.  But  the  Englishman  has  this  one 
additional  advantage  over  all  his  competitors:  his  govern- 
ment throws  no  obstacle  in  the  way  of  his  trading  pro- 
pensities ;  it  gives  him  free  scope  in  providing  his  manu- 
facturing friends  in  Birmingham,  Sheffield,  Manchester, 
and  on  the  Clyde,  with  all  the  raw  material  required, 
without  taxing  it  a  penny. 

Suppose  the  American  government  should  resolve  to 
pursue  a  similar  liberal  policy  ?  Is  there  a  reasonable 
ground  for  doubt,  that,  in  possession  of  the  enormous 
natural  advantages  over  those  of  Great  Britain,  we  would 
not  soon  outstrip  that  country  in  the  race  for  commercial 
supremacy,  secure  an  abundance  of  work  for  our  laborers, 
and  thus  put  an  end  to  pauperism  in  the  manufacturing 
centers  of  the  United  States  ? 


THE  EFFECT  OF  PEOTEOTIOJST  UPO^T 
TJKPKOTECTED  LABOR 


THERE  is  some  plausibility  in  the  claim  of  protection- 
ists that  the  laborers  employed  in  the  coal  and  iron 
mines,  in  the  furnaces  and  rolling-mills,  the  cotton  and 
woolen-mills,  and  other  manufacturing  industries  (the 
products  of  which  are  protected  by  high  import  taxes), 
receive  some  benefit  from  that  protection,  and  there 
may  be  some  excuse  for  the  belief  of  the  miner  or  mill 
operative,  that  a  system  which  increases  the  profits  of  his 
"boss"  has  the  effect  of  increasing  his  wages,  and  for  him  to 
grow  enthusiastic  over  that  S3rstem ;  but  how  a  person 
employed  in  the  building  or  the  thousands  of  other  unpro- 
tected trades  and  occupations,  or  a  farmer,  or  laborer, 
who  receives  not  one  cent's  benefit  from  this  system, 
while  it  increases  everything  he  buys,  can  "enthuse"over  it, 
is  absolutely  incomprehensible,  and  vividly  reminds  one 
of  the  stupid  "  white  trash  "  of  ante  helium  times. 

Only  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago  the  slave-holders 
claimed  that  it  was  in  the  interest  of  the  negro  that  he 
robbed  him  of  his  labor,  and  the  three  million  "  white 
trash  "  who  suffered  most  from  the  effect  of  the  peculiar 
institution,  lustily  re-echoed  that  claim. 

To-day  the  iron  and  coal  lords  of  Pennsylvania  are 
setting  up  the  claim  that  it  is  in  the  interest  of  their  work- 
ingmen  that  they  ask  protection  for  their  product,  and  a 
majority  of  the  fifteen  million  unprotected  farmers  and 
workingmen,  who  are  among  the  chief  victims  of  this 
system,  are  at  the  same  time  its  staunchest  supporters. 

160 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    UNPROTECTED    LABOR.        161 

There  is  no  difference  in  principle  and  effect  between 
the  ignorant  white  trash  champion  of  slavery  times, 
and  the  ignorant,  white  labor  champion  of  protection  of 
to-day. 

Any  sane  man,  giving  this  subject  but  a  moment's  re- 
flection, must  perceive  that  the  only  American  labor  that 
can  receive  any  possible  benefit  from  protection  is  the 
labor  employed  in  making  goods  similar  to  those  that 
are  imported. 

It  would  be  as  useless  and  as  absurd  to  lay  import 
duties  upon  articles  that  from  the  nature  of  things  can- 
not be  imported,  as  it  is  to  lay  a  duty  upon  articles  that 
a/re  not  imported,  such  as  upon  wheat  and  other  agricult- 
ural products,  of  which  we  have  a  surplus  to  sell. 

An  article  produced  or  service  rendered  in  this  country 
cannot  be  protected  against  a  similar  article  produced  or 
similar  service  rendered  abroad,  unless  this  foreign  article 
or  service  can  be  brought  in  competition  with  the  home 
article  or  service,  and  the  wages  of  labor  employed  in  pro- 
ducing such  articles  or  in  rendering  such  services  can,  there- 
fore, not  possibly  be  affected  by  a  tariff  on  imports,  high 
or  low. 

Brick  or  stone  buildings,  for  instance,  cannot  be  im- 
ported, and  as  long  as  the  European  "  pauper  builder " 
stays  and  works  in  Europe,  he  cannot  compete  with  the 
American  builder;  our  masons,  bricklayers,  carpenters, 
roofers,  plumbers,  plasterers,  painters  and  all  other  work- 
men employed  in  the  building  trade,  or  in  rendering  per- 
sonal services,  cannot  in  the  nature  of  things  be  protected 
by  a  tariff  on  houses,  and  it  is  the  height  of  impudence  to 
insist  that  the  protective  sjTstem  can  or  does  affect,  favor- 
ably or  unfavorably,  directly  or  indirectly,  the  wages  of 
any  man  employed  in  any  of  the  various  branches  of  the 


162  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

building  trade,  or  the  thousands  of  occupations  entirely 
disconnected  from  manufacture  or  mining. 

To  be  sure,  the  "  pauper  carpenter,1'  bricklayer,  plas- 
terer, etc.,  may  come  across  the  Atlantic  and  bring  his 
labor  to  this  country  free  of  duty,  to  compete  with  the 
labor  of  American  workmen,  by  offering  to  work  for  lower 
wages. 

There  are  no  laws  in  the  United  States  protecting 
labor  in  the  building  trade  against  an  overflow  of  "  for- 
eign pauper  labor."  There  is  absolute  free  trade  in 
that. 

This  holds  good  for  all  unskilled  labor  of  the  country, 
whether  employed  in  protected  industries  or  not;  whether 
engaged  in  tilling  the  soil,  handling  the  spade,  or  swinging 
the  ax.  It  holds  good  for  the  great  mass  of  the  American 
laborers  employed  upon  the  farms,  upon  our  streets  or  in 
the  shops,  in  trade  and  transportation  as  well  as  those  ren- 
dering professional  and  personal  service.  The  unpro- 
tected classes,  form  the  largest  majority  of  the  producers, 
such  as  merchants,  tradesmen  and  mechanics  of  the  coun- 
try; they  are  the  rule,  the  protected  few  the  exception. 

In  order  to  make  this  statement  clear,  let  us  take  a  few 
occupations  and  examine  the  claims  made  by  the  protec- 
tionist, that  the  labor  therein  employed  is  benefited  by  the 
protective  system. 

"Claim  Every  Thing"  is  the  shibboleth  of  protection- 
ism, but  it  will  hardly  do  to  claim  that  European  railroad, 
express'  and  inland  navigation  companies,  and  the 
"pauper  labor"  therein  employed,  can  by  any  possible 
device  be  brought  into  competition  with  similar  compa- 
nies and  its  labor  in  this  country.  To  be  sure,  the 
"European  pauper"  employed  in  that  line  of  business 
may  come  to  this  country  and  import  his  labor  faculties 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    UNPROTECTED    LABOR.        163 

free  of  duty,  and  being  accustomed  to  work  for  "  pauper 
wages"  and  to  live  upon  cheaper  food,  he  may,  as  is 
claimed,  very  profitably  be  used  by  our  transportation 
magnates  in  "bearing"  this  particular  labor  market,  and 
in  compelling  their  employes  to  submit  to  a  cut  in  wages. 

Now,  will  some  acute  protectionist  inform  us  what 
earthly  benefit  it  is  to  any  of  the  million  of  men  employed 
in  the  transportation  business,  that  the  product  of  the 
cotton  and  woolen  manufacturer,  of  the  iron  and  coal 
operator,  and  of  the  whole  tribe  of  subsidy  beggars  is 
protected  by  the  Federal  government  from  50  per  cent 
to  150  per  cent  against  the  product  of  their  foreign  com 
petitors?  The  benefits  are  all  the  other  way,  and  every 
person  employed  in  transportation  is  tributary  to  the 
manufacturer  to  the  amount  of  the  increase  in  the  price 
of  the  commodities  he  has  to  purchase. 

According  to  the  last  United  States  census  there  were 
in  1880  two  million  persons  classified  as  laborers.  Their 
tools  are  very  simple;  they  consist  of  the  shovel,  the 
spade  and  the  pick,  the  saw  and  the  ax,  the  spur  and  the 
whip.  They  are  our  daily  toilers,  doing  the  work  which 
rehires  great  physical  exertion.  They  clean  our  streets 
and  sewers,  dig  our  trenches,  throw  up  our  railroad  em- 
bankments, drive  our  teams  and  take  care  of  our  horses, 
split  our  wood,  load  and  unload  our  vessels  and  freight 
cars  —  in  short,  they  perform  the  toilsome  drudgery  of  the 
American  people. 

All  this  labor  has  of  a  necessity  to  be  done  here,  and 
"European  pauper  labor"  cannot  possibly  compete  with 
the  American  laborer,  and  it  is  adding  insult  to  injury  to 
tell  him  that  the  rate  of  his  wages  depends  upon  the 
amount  of  import  taxes  piled  upon  the  things  he  must  buy. 

The  only  way  in  which  the  foreign  pauper  laborers  can 


164  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

be  brought  into  competition  with  our  American  labor  is  by 
shipping  them  to  this  country,  which  is  done  to  a  liberal 
extent  by  the  bosses  of  our  protected  industries.*  Hun- 
dreds of  thousands  of  these  laborers  are  yearly  landing 
at  Castle  Garden  under  the  system  of  absolute  free  trade, 
immediately  to  compete  with  similar  American  laborers, 
and  by  overcrowding  the  labor  market  are  breaking 
down  the  wages  of  our  own  labor.  Now  let  us  suppose 
the  protective  s}7stem  were  wiped  out ;  cheajr  European 
commodities  permitted  to  come  in  at  a  low  duty,  compell- 
ing the  home  manufacturer  to  lessen  his  profits  by  lower- 
ing the  price  of  his  goods ;  is  it  not  plain,  as  far  as  these 
two  million  of  laborers  are  concerned,  they  being  mainly 
consumers,  that  they  would  be  immensely  benefited  by 
the  change? 

From  the  same  census  report  it  appears  that  in  1880 
1,075,653  persons  earned  their  livelihood  as  domestic  serv- 
ants. The  rate  of  wages  of  these  people  differs  accord- 
ing to  circumstances  and  locality. 

When  gold  was  discovered  in  California  there  was 
hardly  a  limit  to  the  prices  paid  for  domestic  service ; 
$5  nor  $10  a  day  commanded  the  best. 

♦About  a  year  and  a  half  ago  there  was  a  strike  of  the  cigar-makers  of  the 
city  of  Milwaukee.  They  were  striking  for  an  increase.  At  that  time  the  manu- 
facturers there  accorded  the  demands  of  the  cigar-makers,  except  one  firm, 
which,  being  the  largest,  declined  to  fall  in.  As  a  consequence,  the  other  manu- 
facturers, who  had  already  acceded  to  the  wishes  of  the  strikers,  were  induced 
to  lock  them  out  and  not  to  re-employ  them  while  they  continued  to  belong  to 
the  "union  "or  would  insist  upon  an  increase  of  wages.  This  result  accom- 
plished, the  advertising  began  throughout  the  country  for  cigar-makers  to  gi» 
to  Milwaukee  —  this  firm,  at  the  same  time,  sending  agents  to  Germany  to  insert 
in  the  public  papers  very  rose-colored  pictures  of  Milwaukee  and  the  surround- 
ing country,  of  the  advantages  of  employment  offered  by  them,  etc.  This  was 
not  only  done,  but  circulars  were  sent  out,  and  the  consuls  of  the  United 
States,  stationed  in  the  different  parts  of  Germany,  indorsed  these  rose-colored 
pictures  and  descriptions  with  their  signatures  and  with  their  official  seals.  A 
very  good  use  was  made  of  the  representatives  of  this  country  in  Germany,  it 
will  be  .seen,  to  assist  in  defeating  and  undermining  the  working-men  in  Mil- 
waukee— Report  of  lite  U.  S.  (  ommittee  on  Labor  and  Capital, 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    UNPROTECTED    LABOR.        165 

In  Chicago,  or  in  any  other  large  city,  the  wages  of 
domestic  servants,  both  male  and  female,  are  higher  than 
in  the  smaller  towns  in  the  country.  Has  the  protective 
tariff  anything  to  do  with  that  %  And  if  domestic  serv- 
ants in  this  country  earn,  on  an  average,  ten  times  the 
Avages  paid  in  Germany  for  the  same  labor,  is  it  on 
account  of  protection,  or  is  it  because  there  are  ten  per- 
sons in  Germany  to  one  here  willing  to  do  the  work  of  a 
domestic  servant? 

There  is  absolute  free  trade  in  domestic  labor,  and  if 
all  indications  do  not  deceive,  the  European  "  pauper  serv- 
ant" will  soon  overflow  this  country  and  will  cause  a 
reduction  of  wages,  even  if  all  importation  of  foreign 
goods  are  prohibited.  Protection  to  the  one  million 
servants  of  the  country  means  no  more  nor  less  than  fifty 
per  cent  additional  cost  for  every  article  they  must  buy. 

Under  the  classification  of  manufacture  and  mining1 
the  last  census  report  enumerates  172,726  blacksmiths. 

JSTow,  it  would  probably  puzzle  Mr.  "  pig-iron  "  Kelly 
himself,  if  he  were  asked  to  exactly  state  where  the  bene- 
fits of  the  protective  system  to  a  blacksmith  come  in. 
Our  horses  and  mules  can  not  conveniently  be  shipped  to 
Europe  to  be  shod  by  some  "pauper  blacksmith"  for  one- 
quarter  of  the  amount  that  it  costs  here. 

There  is  one  way,  however,  in  which  this  horse-shoe- 
ing may  be  made  cheaper,  in  spite  of  the  high  tariff  on 
horse-shoes,  nails,  coal  and  the  smith's  tools,  and  that  is, 
by  bringing  the  "pauper  blacksmith"  from  Europe  to 
this  country,  on  the  free-trade-in-labor  plan,  in  suffici- 
ently large  numbers  to  create  a  surplus  over  the  demand 
of  that  particular  labor  here,  wrhen  increased  competition 
among  the  blacksmiths  will  enable  the  bosses  to  "bear" 
the  wages. 


166  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

If  the  solicitude  of  the  protectionists  for  American 
workingmen  is  genuine,  why  do  they  not  ask  Congress 
tc  lay  a  heavy  tax  on  the  import  of  pauper  blacksmiths  ? 
Their  solicitude  is  a  fraudulent  pretense  by  which  black- 
smiths, the  same  as  all  other  toilers,  are  fooled  into  the 
support  of  the  so-called  "  Protection  to  American  Labor  " 
folly. 

The  same  census  furnishes  the  information  that  44,851 
persons  are  devoting  their  time  to  the  useful  occupation 
of  barbers.  The  average  price  for  a  shave  in  large  cities 
is  fifteen  cents,  and  ten  cents  in  the  country  towns.  In 
Germany  the  same  service  may  be  obtained  for  less  than 
one-third  the  amount,  or  four  or  five  cents. 

Will  any  protectionist  assert  that  it  is  the  protective 
system  which  enables  the  American  barber  to  obtain 
three  times  the  amount  charged  in  Germany  for  the 
same  service?  Is  it  not  mainly  because  in  Germany  peo- 
ple shave  themselves  to  a  large  extent,  while  in  busy 
America,  where  time  is  money,  it  is  cheaper  to  be  shaved  ? 
Consequently,  barbers  here  are  in  more  demand,  while 
the  supply  is  limited.  Increased  demand  in  services,  the 
same  as  increased  demand  in  goods,  is  always  followed  by 
an  increase  in  wages. 

Now,  if  these  44,851  barbers  are  so  fortunately  sit- 
uated as  to  obtain  three  or  four  times  the  wages  their 
less  fortunate  fellows  obtain  in  Europe,  are  they  in  any 
way  indebted  to  the  prevailing  system  of  protection  for  this 
special  advantage,  and  have  the  men  in  charge  of,  or  who 
are  employed  in  any  other  industry,  the  right  to  demand 
that  each  one  of  these  barbers  contribute  a  part  of  his 
earnings,  say  one  or  two  cents  from  each  shave,  to  the 
support  and  encouragement  of  some  other  particular  in- 
dustry, and  without  a  farthing's  equivalent  in  return? 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON    UNPROTECTED    LABOR.        167 

The  claim  is  too  flimsy  to  be  earnestly  considered  by 
anybody. 

The  census  says  that  in  1880  our  flouring-mills  occu- 
pied 53,440  millers.  Suppose  these  millers  earn  $2.50  a 
day  on  the  average,  while  the  European  miller  earns  only 
seventy-five  cents  a  day.  How  is  the  American  miller  to 
be  protected  against  the  pauper  miller  of  Europe? 

It  would  be  an  expensive  business  for  us  to  send  our  grain 
to  Europe  to  be  made  into  flour  by  the  European  miller  and 
shipped  back  again.  But  even  if  it  were  possible,  it 
would  not  be  profitable,  for,  although  we  are  paying  our 
millers  three  times  the  wages  paid  to  millers  abroad, 
owing  to  our  natural  advantages  and  the  superior  skill 
and  intelligence  of  our  mill  operators,  American  flour 
undersells  in  the  markets  of  Liverpool  the  "pauper"  flour 
of  every  other  country. 

Nothing  can  protect,  that  is,  can  increase  the  American 
millers'  wages  but  an  enlarged  market  for  his  product. 
The  more  flour  we  export  the  more  millers  we  need.  If 
the  demand  exceeds  the  supply,  a  rise  in  wages  is  in- 
evitable. 

The  last  United  States  census  enumerates  79,625  engi- 
neers and  firemen.  It  would  probably  tax  the  ingenuity 
of  the  "smartest"  protectionist  to  tell  us  how  the  wages 
of  these  80,000  American  laborers  can  be  so  threatened 
by  the  cheap  wages  of  the  European  "  pauper  engineer 
and  fireman"  as  to  require  "protection." 

Our  engines  cannot  conveniently  be  "  fired  "  and  "  run  " 
from  Europe  with  their  cheap  "  pauper  engineer  and  fire- 
man "  labor.  All  that  work  has  to  be  done  here.  The 
only  competition,  and  a  consequent  reduction  in  wages, 
this  class  of  labor  has  to  fear,  is  the  labor  of  the  European 
"pauper  engineer  and  fireman,"  which,  under    the  free 


168  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

trade  system  in  labor  is  imported  into  this  country  by 
thousands. 

Is  it  due  to  the  protective  system  that  the  85,G71 
physicians  and  surgeons,  the  227,710  teachers,  the  30,477 
musicians,  enumerated  in  the  last  census,  receive  on  the' 
average  double  and  triple  the  remuneration  similar  service 
commands  in  Germany  ? 

No,  it  is  due  to  the  *  exceptional  natural  advantages 
this  country  has  over  those  of  any  other  country  in  the 
world.  And  as  these  useful  classes  of  our  population  can- 
not obtain  any  possible  benefit  from  protection,  why 
should  they  be  taxed  upon  their  necessaries  for  the  benefit 
of  some  manufacturer? 

They  are  all  willing  to  contribute  their  share  to  the 
support  of  the  government,  but  every  dollar  taken  from 
them  for  the  benefit  of  another  citizen  is  simply  robbery. 

The  last  census  enumerates  380,718  persons  as  clerks. 
It  will  not  be  maintained  that  the  wages  of  these  clerks, 
whose  labor  has  necessarily  to  be  done  here,  can  be  pro- 
tected against  the  cheap  wages  of  the  "pauper  clerk"  in 
Europe  by  a  tariff  on  imports.  It  is  a  plain  matter  of  sup- 
ply and  demand.  If  trade  is  brisk  the  demand  for  clerks 
will  increase  and  so  will  their  wages,  provided  the  sup- 
ply in  clerks  is  short. 

But,  as  agriculture  is  being  discarded  by  "Young 
America,"  and  the  trades-unions  step  in  and  prohibit  our 
young  boys  from  learning  a  trade,  clerical  help  will  soon 
be  a  drug  in  the  general  labor  market  of  the  country, 
when  the  wages  of  this  class  may  fall  below  the  wages  of 
the  pauper  clerks  in  overcrowded  Europe. 

The  washing  of  our  dirty  linen  by  the  121,942  launder- 
ers  and  washwomen  enumerated  in  the  last  census  is  much 
more  expensive  here  than  in  Europe.    But  the  "pauper 


EFFECT   OF    PROTECTION   ON   UNPROTECTED   LABOR.       169 

launtlerers"  of  the  old  country  who  would  do  the  work 
for  less  than  one-half  cannot,  as  long  as  they  remain  there, 
possibly  compete  with  the  American  labor  employed  in 
washing.  There  being  no  competition,  there  can  be  no 
protection  against  it. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  protection  enhances  the  price 
of  every  article  the  launderers  have  to  purchase  fifty  per 
cent  on  the  average,  consequently  reducing  the  amount  of 
their  earnings  just  that  much. 

Of  what  benefit  is  it  to  the  64,678  clergymen  enumer- 
ated in  the  last  census  that,  by  a  shrewdly-devised  system 
of  taxation,  the  manufacturer  of  cloth  is  placed  in  a  posi- 
tion to  charge  fifty  or  seventy-five  per  cent  more  for  the 
clothes  he  is  obliged  to  appear  in  upon  a  Sunday  ? 

Does  the  cloth  manufacturer  divide  the  extra  profit 
obtained  through  protection  among  the  preachers  ? 

But  it  is  useless  to  continue  these  illustrations ;  the 
remarks  made  in  reference  to  each  applies  with  equal 
force  to  all  the  4,047,238  persons  enumerated  in  the  last 
census  under  the  head  of  professional  and  personal  serv- 
ices; to  the  1,819,256  persons  enumerated  under  the  head 
of  trade  and  transportation,  and  to  over  half  the  persons 
enumerated  under  manufacture  —  as,  for  instance-,  the 
41,309  bakers,  the  194,079  boot  and  shoemakers,  whose 
employers  could  compete  with  any  shoemaking  employ- 
ers in  the  world  if  they  were  not  heavily  taxed  by  the 
duties  on  raw  material,  the  373,143  carpenters  and  join- 
ers, the  49,138  coopers,  the  34,536  employes  (not  specified), 
the  41,352  fishermen  and  oystermen,  the  102,473  brick 
and  stone  masons,  the  128,556  painters  and  varnishers, 
the  22,083  plasterers,  the  72,726  printers,  lithographers 
and  stereotypers,  the  77,050  saw-mill  employes  and  the 
hundreds  of  thousands  in  numerous  other  trades. 


EFFECT    OF    THE     PROTECTIVE     SYSTEM    ON" 
MANUFACTURERS. 


IF,  as  I  have  endeavored  to  show,  the  protective  system 
does  not  promote  the  general  prosperity  of  the  coun- 
try, that  it  injuriously  affects  the  farmer,  that  it  does 
not  benefit  labor  employed  in  protected  industries,  while 
it  robs  unprotected  labor  of  half  of  its  earnings  through 
the  increased  price  of  the  necessaries  of  life,  the  system 
ought,  at  least,  to  possess  the  quality  of  benefiting  the 
industries  for  which  it  was  established. 

Now,  if  I  am  able  to  show  that  while  protection 
enriches  a  few  of  the  manufacturers  and  mine  owners  it 
injures  the  many,  that  the  tax  upon  the  raw  material  of 
the  manufacturer  prevents  him  from  competing  in  foreign 
markets,  that  it  impedes  the  progress  and  full  develop- 
ment of  our  industrial  resources,  that  it  robs  labor  of  its 
opportunities  for  steady  employment,  that  it  places  a  pre- 
mium upon  the  production  of  shoddy,  worthless  articles, 
that,  by  destroying  competition,  it  fosters  combinations 
and  monopolies,  and  the  organization  of  powerful 
trusts,  to  the  extortion  of  the  consumers,  and  to  the  det- 
riment of  individual  thrift  and  enterprise,  and  last,  but 
not  least,  that  it  has  the  pernicious  effect  of  dividing  the 
people  of  the  United  States  into  two  antagonistic 
classes,  then  I  believe  I  have  proven  my  case. 

As  has  already  been  shown,  the  exorbitant  increase 
of  the  tariff  rates  during  the  needs  of  the  late  war,  causing 
a  falling  off  in  the  importation  of  foreign  articles,  had  the 

170 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   03Sf   MANUFACTURERS.  171 

immediate  effect  of  increasing  the  demand  for  the  home- 
made product.  The  wastefulness  of  a  prolonged  war,  the 
steady  flow  of  immigration  to  the  United  States,  and,  later 
on,  the  needs  of  the  recuperating  South,  all  served  to  keep 
this  demand  in  excess  of  the  supply. 

Attracted  by  the  enormous  profits  realized,  capital 
began  to  drift  into  numerous  manufacturing  enterprises  ; 
the  facilities  of  old  factories  were  enlarged,  new  ones 
established,  and  supplied  with  modern  and  more  effective 
machinery. 

The  causes  above  enumerated,  added  to  the  speculative 
period  of  railroad  extension  and  a  depreciated  currency, 
had  the  effect  of  keeping  prices  stationary.  Times  were 
good  and  the  people  apparently  prosperous.  Labor  found 
ample  and  remunerative  employment,  and  the  manufact- 
urers and  corporations  realized  immense  fortunes. 

But  when  these  extraordinary  demands  were  supplied, 
and  all  the  railroads  needed  and  many  that  were  not 
needed  had  besn  built,  the  home  market  for  iron  and  the 
various  manufactured  products  became  "  glutted,"  and  as 
a  consequence,  in  1878  the  inflated  manufacturing  balloon 
exploded  with  a  crash.  The  sad  story  of  that  period  is 
well  remembered  in  every  household  in  the  land,  for  but 
few  were  left  unharmed.  It  was  a  period  of  bankruptcies, 
of  financial  ruin  and  desolation.  Protection  was  thus 
brought  face  to  face  with  its  logical  effect  —  over-produc- 
tion followed  by  industrial  paralysis.  This  period  was 
forcibly  described  by  Gen.  Banks,  who,  upon  the  floor  of 
Congress,  said  : 

"Business  is  suspended.  The  people  do  not  buy  and 
they  do  not  sell.  They  are  holding  their  breath,  waiting 
for  what  may  possibly  be  the  result  of  the  action  of 
Congress  upon  these  subjects,  or  for  some  fortunate  and 


172  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

fundamental  change  in  the  condition  of  financial  and 
public  affairs  —  a  change  that  I  fear  will  not  come.  This 
year  must  be  one  of  calamity  to  the  government,  as  it  is 
of  financial  and  industrial  depression  and  distress  to  the 
people  in  all  parts  of  the  country.  The  signs  of  it  are  all 
around  us ;  multitudes  out  of  employment ;  labor  strikes 
threatened  or  inaugurated  of  unprecedented  magnitude 
in  this  country  and  in  Europe;  savings  banks  tottering ; 
unpaid  taxes  accumulating  with  frightful  rapidity;  debts 
increasing;  property  diminishing  in  value;  confidence 
wanting  and  hope  failing;  stay  laws  suggested  or 
enacted  ;  and  too  frequent  suggestions  of  communism  and 
revolution  awakening." 

To  Mr.  Banks'  gloomy  picture  may  be  added  that  of 
the  Hon.  "Wm.  M.  Evarts,  Secretary  of  State,  under  Presi- 
dent Hayes,  an  ardent  protectionist,  who  in  his  annual 
report  said : 

"Out  of  1,714  blast  furnaces,  478  are  out  of  blast,  in 
all  representing  $400,000,000  capital." 

Add  to  these  the  closing  up  of  thousands  of  various 
manufacturing  establishments  and  mines  for  good,  or  for 
longer  and  shorter  periods,  the  universal  cutting  of  wages, 
and  the  throwing  out  of  employment  of  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  workmen,  who,  as  "tramps,"  filled  the 
highways  of  the  country,  and  whose  physical  needs 
served  to  create  a  state  of  insecurity  in  the  land,  and 
the  picture  will  be  completed. 

This  period  was  but  the  natural  result  of  the  govern- 
ment's hot-house  policy,  and  it  is  easy  to  see  that  a  com- 
parative few  manufacturers,  those  only  who  were  able  to 
weather  the  storm,  were  the  beneficiaries  of  the  fifteen 
years  of  protection,  while  some  of  the  people  who  had 
been  prosperous  enough  to  save  a  few  dollars  during  this 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  173 

historical  period  of  inflation,  now  lost  it  through  the  col- 
lapse of  savings  banks,  insurance  companies  and  the 
shrinkage  in  railroad  stocks. 

This  was  the  state  of  the  country  at  the  close  of  the 
last  decade,  a  condition  in  which  it  might  have  remained 
indefinitely,  but  for  the  years  of  plentiful  harvests  imme- 
diately following. 

FREE  RAW  MATERIAL. 

Now,  as  to  the  second  proposition,  "  that  the  tax  upon 
the  raw  material  of  our  manufacturer  prevents  him  from 
competing  in  foreign  markets,  impedes  the  progress  and 
full  development  of  our  industrial  resources,  and  robs 
labor  of  its  opportunities  for  steady  employment." 

I  think  I  am  safe  in  saying,  that  the  most  pernicious 
effect  of  this  system  upon  the  manufacturing  industries 
of  the'country  is  the  tax  levied  upon  its  raw  material. 
This  import  tax,  which  also  enhances  the  price  of  the 
home  article  from  twenty-five  to  fifty  per  cent,  naturally 
increases  the  cost  of  production  to  that  extent,  thus  pre- 
venting our  manufacturers  from  competing  with  the  for- 
eign producers,  who  obtain  their  raw  material  tax  free. 

The  great  staples  upon  which  our  principal  industries 
are  based,  are  iron,  wool,  cotton  and  coal. 

There  is  hardly  a  finished  article  of  any  kind  of 
which  one  or  the  other  of  these  materials  is  not  a  compo- 
nent part,  and  consequently,  any  tax  laid  upon  these  mate- 
rials is  a  tax  upon  every  factory  in  the  land,  and  is  as  much 
a  tax  upon  the  necessaries  of  life  as  a  tax  would  be  upon 
bread  and  meat.  But  while  it  unjustly  oppresses  the 
American  consumer,  it  has  also  the  effect  of  shutting  out 
the  American  manufacturer  of  finished  goods  from  the 
benefits  of  the  world's  market,  because  his  foreign  com- 
petitor pays  no  such  tax. 


174  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

Take  the  iron  industry,  for  instance.  Consider  for  a 
moment  the  multiplicity  of  interests  involved  in  trans- 
forming the  crude  material  into  the  infinitesimal  varieties 
of  articles,  from  the  huge  naval  iron-clad  to  the  insignifi- 
cant hair-pin;  the  thousands  of  large  and  small  factories, 
keeping  busy  hundreds  of  thousands  of  hands !  Think  of 
the  unremitting  strain  and  ingenuity  which  taxes  the 
brain  of  the  managers  of  these  various  interests,  in  the 
endeavor  to  extend  the  market  for  their  wares  in  compe- 
tition with  the  English,  German  and  French  manufacturer, 
which  they  are  now  doing  to  a  limited  extent,  *and  then 
contemplate  the  action  of  our  Federal  government,  which 
is  doing  its  utmost  to  stifle  these  laudable  efforts  by 
authorizing  the  owners  of  a  few  iron  mines  and  their  rail- 
road allies,  to  levy  a  tribute  of  $7.00  a  ton  upon  their  raw 
material ! 

Aside  from  the  impudent  and  absolutely  fraudulent 
claim,  that  protection  on  iron  ore  and  pig-iron  is  needed 

*  Testimony  of  Mr.  D.  B.  Buford,  of  Rock  Island,  one  of  the  most  extensive 
and  successful  plow  makers  in  the  world,  before  the  tariff  commission :  "  There 
is  not  one  article  that  we  make,  that  is  in  the  least  benefited  by  the  tariff.  On 
the  contrary,  almost  everything-  that  Ave  buy  is  enhanced  by  the  tariff,  and  of 
course  our  customers,  in  turn,  have  to  pay  more  for  what  they  buyof  us.  Almost 
every  manufacturer  in  the  West  laborsundcr  this  disadvantage.  We  ship  large 
amounts  of  our  products  abroad  where  we  have  to  compete  whh  foreign  makers. 
Elsewhere  we  are  compelled  to  enter  the  field  and  fight,  hampered  Jt>y  increased 
cost  of  materials,  caused  by  the  duties  upon  iron  and  steel."  Mr.  Lucius 
Wells,  formerly  manager  of  Deere  &  Co.,  Moline,  Til.,  "  which  turned  out  100,000 
plows  in  1881,  says  that  the  cost  of  every  implement  turned  out  by  his  house  is 
enhanced  15  to  25  per  cent  by  the  present  tariff,  with  no  compensating  benefit." 

"The  industries  at  Trenton  are  suffering  from  useless  obstructions  imposed 
by  the  existing  tariff.  I  seek  to  remove  the  obstructions  in  order  that  the  capital 
and  labor  employed  in  branches  of  business  affected  by  them  may  have  steady 
and  remunerative  occupation  which  is  now  impossible.  The  removal  of  the 
duty  on  scrap  iron,  for  example,  which  benefits  no  existing  interest  whatever, 
would  enable  every  idle  train  in  Trenton  to  be  run  day  and  night,  and  the  money 
which  is  now  paid  for  foreign  rods  would  be  largely  distributed  among  the 
working-classes  of  Trenton  who  are  condemned  to  idleness  through  no  fault  of 
their  own,  and  every  business  interest  of  the  city  would  flourish  in  a  corre- 
sponding degree."— Spccclt,  of  Hon.  Ahram  S.  Hewitt,  at  Trenton,  N.  J. 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  175 

against  the  pauper  labor  of  Europe,  there  is  no  earthly 
reason  why  the  producers  of  that  material  should  be 
entitled  to  more  favors  than  the  producer  of  cotton,  who 
gets  along  very  well  without  protection. 

Considering,  that  our  iron  ore  is  found  almost  on  the 
earth's  surface,  consequently  mined  with  greater  facility 
and  at  less  expense,  there  is  no  good  reason  why  this  ma- 
terial should  be  higher  in  price  than  in  England.*  At  all 
events  the  additional  expense  of  freight  to  bring  it  here 
would  more  than  cover  the  difference  in  the  price  of  labor. 

♦"There  is  no  place  in  the  United  States,  and  probably  not  in  any  other 
country,  where  iron  can  be  manufactured  more  cheaply  than  here."  (Geolog. 
Survey  of  Ohio,  Vol.  Ill,  page  174.)  And  again  (Ibid,  page  661) :  "In  facilities 
for  making  iron,  the  owners  of  these  lands  are  substantially  independent  of 
tariff  and  panics.  There  is  really  no  danger  that  the  price  of  iron  will  become 
so  low  thatit  cannot  be  manufactured  at  a  profit." 

*  The  Pittsburgh  Gazet te  (high  tariff )  proclaims  in  tones  of  exultation  that  at 
last  natural  gas  and  superior  workmanship  have  "  overcome  the  low  wages  of 
England  and  other  European  countries."  It  goes  on  to  tell,  with  much  super- 
fluity of  words,  how  that  Park  Brothers,  of  the  Black  Diamond  Steel  Works, 
have  established  branch  houses  in  six  or  eight  of  the  principal  cities  of  Europe, 
India  and  Australia,  for  the  sale  of  the  finer  grades  of  steel,  particularly  that 
used  in  making  edged  tools,  The  cities  referred  to  are  London,  Paris,  Stock- 
holm, St.  Petersburg,  Madras,  Christiana,  Dartmund,  Sydney,  Melbourne  and 
Athens.  The  reader  is  assured  that  this  "  means  business  "  on  a  large  and 
increasing  scale.  He  is  further  informed  that  such  is  the  superiority  of  the 
Pittsburgh  works  in  the  production  of  these  grades  of  steel,  that  Swedish  iron 
is  imported  by  the  manufacturers,  made  into  fine  steel,  and  sent  back  to  the 
country  from  which  it  originally  came. 

Now,  it  is  exceedingly  gratifying  to  know  that  Pittsburgh  manufacturers 
can  make  tool  steel  and  sell  it  in  the  markets  of  the  world,  including  England, 
and  ask  no  favors  of  competitors.  That  is  the  sort  of  tiling  in  which  Ameri- 
cans may  justly  take  pride.  And  it  is  the  sort  of  thing  that  Ave  would  witness 
on  a  far  more  extensive  scale,  if  our  manufacturers  were  not  protected  to 
death  ;  that  is  to  say,  if  they  were  not  handicapped  by  tariff  taxes  on  produc- 
tion, at  every  turn,  as  the  Pittsburgh  concern  is,  from  the  ore  to  the  finished 
product.  It  would  le  still  more  gratifying  to  be  fully  assured  that  the  Pitts- 
burgh concern  was  engaged  in  straight  and  honest  competition.  It  will  not  be 
so  gratifying  to  learn  that  it  is  exacting  from  American  purchasers  the  full 
pound  of  flesh  allowed  by  the  tariff,  and  thus  making  inordinate  profits  at 
home  to  enable  it  to  sell  to  foreigners  at  a  trifling  profit.  Full  assurance  upon 
that  point  would  materially  deepen  the  glow  of  pride  with  which  one  contem- 
plates a  signal  industrial  triumph  achieved  by  Americans,  even,  though  **hey 
may  be  largely  indebted  to  gas  for  their  success.— Chicago  Tin\es, 


176  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

The  actual  cost  of  producing  a  ton  of  pig-iron  in 
Pennsylvania  and  Ohio  has  been  variously  estimated  at 
from  $10  to  $13,  but  the  statement  of  some  of  the  most 
prominent  iron  manufacturers,  in  reply  to  a  circular  letter 
from  the  American  Iron  and  Steel  Association,  the  lead- 
ing protectionist  organization  in  the  country,  leaves  no 
doubt  upon  that  subject. 

These  gentlemen  admit,  that,  "  when  wages  were 
much  higher,  the  actual  wages  paid  for  mining  iron 
ore  were  $2.81,  and  for  the  coal  $1.22.  Adding  40 
cents  wages  paid  for  quarrying  limestone,  we  get  the 
total  labor  for  producing  the  raw  material  of  one  ton  of 
pig  iron  to  be  $4.43,  instead  of  $10.26,  as  claimed  by  the 
association.  If,  to  the  actual  labor  paid  for  mining  the 
raw  material,  as  given  positively  by  the  census  —  $1.35 
per  ton,  of  ore,  which  the  statistics  of  Mr.  Swank,  the 
general  manager  of  the  association,  says  averages 
fifty-five  per  cent  metallic  iron,  and  79  cents  per  ton  of 
coal,  of  which  one  and  one-half  tons  are  used  to  smelt 
a  ton  of  pig  —  and  to  the  labor  of  transportation,  as 
estimated  by  the  protectionist  Iron  Age,  we  add  a 
profit  of  twenty  per  cent,  the  expenses  at  the  furnace 
itself,  and  the  sundry  charges,  we  find  that  the  real  cost 
of  the  pig,  per  ton,  will  vary  from  $10.50  to  $1-3,  accord- 
ing as  the  business  is  conducted  under  economic  man- 
agement and  with  improved  plant,  or  the  reverse." 

This  statement  is  signed  by  J.  B.  Sargent,  Sargent  & 
Co.,  New  Haven,  Conn. ;  Eclw.  J.  Shriver,  ~New  York ; 
Graham  McAclam,  late  president  Cromwell  Iron  Com- 
pany, New  York ;  Lindley  Yinton,  president  Yinton  Iron 
"Works,  Indianapolis ;  M.  D.  Harter,  treasurer  and  super- 
intendent Aultman  &  Taylor  Company,  Mansfield,  Ohio  ; 
John  II.  Miller,  secretary  and  treasurer  Schreidt  &  Miller 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  177 

Company,  Mansfield,  Ohio ;  Isaac  Harter,  president  Peer- 
less Eeaper  Company,  Canton,  Ohio;  W.  G.  Gibbons, 
Wilmington,  Del. 

Several  iron  furnaces  in  the  Hocking  Valley,  Ohio,  are 
now  producing  pig-iron  at  $10  per  ton.  But  of  late  years 
the  South,  with  her  eleven  thousand  square  miles  of  coal 
beds,  of  iron  ore  and  limestone,  has  entered  the  field 
and  wil>  prove  a  much  more  dangerous  competitor  to 
the  iron  lords  of  Pennsylvania  than  England.* 

*  Recent  investigations  of  the  cost  of  making  pig-iron  in  the  South  throw 
additional  light  on  this  subject.  Mr.  R.  W.  Knott,  of  the  Louisville  Courier- 
Journal,  cited  in  that  journal  in  1884  figures  from  the  books  of  an  Alabama  fur- 
nace producing  1,786  tons  per  month,  showing  that  pig  was  actually  produced  at 
a  cost  of  $9.77  per  ton  (including  $4.76  for  coke,  $1.30  for  ore,  80  cents  for  lime- 
stone, $1.67  wages,  61  cents  officers'  salaries,  53  cents  taxes,  stock,  fuel,  and  mis- 
cellaneous expenses).  Mr.  R.  P.  Porter,  of  the  Philadelphia  Press,  protectionist, 
was  sent  South  to  counteract  these  figures,  but  his  own  report,  in  his  paper  of 
June  4,  1884,  gave  among  his  figures  a  cost  of  $11.90  at  Sloss  furnace,  $9.20  Alice 
furnace,  $11.90  Cowan  furnace.  Mr.  J.  C  Bayles,  of  the  Iron  Aye,  in  his  pres- 
idential address  at  Chattanooga,  before  the  American  Institute  of  Mining  En- 
gineers, made  an  estimate  of  $12.35,  being  for  ore,  $3(21-5  tons  at  $1.25);  for 
coke,  $5  (two  tons,  at  $2.50) ;  for  limestone,  one  ton,  85  cents ;  for  wages  and 
salaries,  $2.50 ;  for  interest  and  expense,  50  cents ;  for  repairs  and  replacements, 
50  cents.  Since  the  furnaces  at  Birmingham,  Ala.,  neither  mine  coal  or  ore,  nor 
quarry  limestone  for  themselves,  but  buy  their  materials,  the  cost  of  this  part 
of  the  product  is  directly  ascertainable  by  anyone  who  can  get  at  the  facts  on 
the  spot.  Mr.  Lindley  Vinton,  president  of  the  Vinton  Iron  Works,  Indian- 
apolis, visited  these  furnaces  in  May,  1885,  and  describes  the  region  as  the  most 
promising  field  for  iron  making  in  the  world  —  rich  coal  in  thick  veins  running 
horizontally  near  the  surface,  covering  an  area  of  11,000  square  miles ;  along  its 
borders  rich  hematite  and  fossil  ores  and  beds  of  limestone,  its  surface  covered 
with  forests  for  charcoal,  the  furnaces  of  the  best  models,  with  Whitwall  stoves, 
and  every  facility  for  making  the  best  use  of  the  ore ;  limestone,  coal  and  char- 
coal at  the  furnace-doors.  The  ore,  a  red  and  brown  hematite,  is  delivered  in 
the  stock-house,  guaranteed  to  contain  50  per  cent  of  iron,  at  90  cents  per  ton, 
limestone  at  90  cents  per  ton,  coal  at  $1.15  per  ton ;  "  the  material  for  a  ton  of 
iron  can  be  purchased  for  from  $4.25  to  $5,  delivered  at  the  stock-house."  Using 
Mr.  Bayles1  figures  as  to  quantity,  with  actual  figures  instead  of  estimates  of 
price,  we  have  then  for  ore  (2  1-5  tons,  at  90  cents)  $1.98  instead  of  $3 ;  for  coke 
(two  tons,  at  $2  to  $2.25)  $4  or  $4.25,  instead  of  $5 ;  for  limestone,  90  cents, 
instead  of  his  85  cents,  a  net  decrease  of  $1.37  or  $1.47,  making  the  cost  of  mater- 
ial $6.88  or  $7.38.  The  estimate  for  quantity  of  coke  used  is  large.  Adding  Mr. 
Bayles1  own  estimate  ($3.50)  for  labor,  salaries,  expense  and  replacement,  we 
have  the  total  cost  $10.38  to  $10.88  per  ton.  Mr.  A.  S.  Hewitt  estimates  the  labor 
cost  at  furnace  at  $1.40  per  ton,  a  still  further  reduction.    It  was  stated  that  the 


178  THE   PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

In  Bradstreet's  market  report,  September  23,  1887, 
the  selling  price  of  our  pig-iron  was  shown  to  be  $21  and 
822  a  ton,  or  an  additional  profit  of  from  $9  to  $12  per 
ton.  And  for  whose  benefit  ?  It  is  claimed  that  foreign 
ore  and  pig-iron  are  taxed  to  protect  American  labor. 
But  how  much  of  this  extra  price  goes  to  the  miner 
and  iron-worker?  Last  year  this  same  pig-iron  was 
quoted  at  $18,  a  net  increase  of  $3  per  ton  in  one  year. 
Have  the  wages  of  the  men  who  did  the  work  been  in- 
creased one  cent  during  that  time  ?  ~No,  and  as  long  as 
they  believe  that  protection  does  increase  their  wages, 
there  is  no  necessity  for  actually  doing  it.  It  is  for  no 
such  purpose  that  the  government  of  the  United  States 


:ost  of  ore  to  Mr.  Morris  was  25  cents  per  ton  royalty  (reaching  as  high  as  $10,000 
>er  acre  to  the  Pratt  Iron  and  Coal  Company,  owning  the  mines),  29  cents  min- 
ing, 25  cents  transportation  to  furnace,  the  selling  price  being  90  cents,  delivered 
it  stock-house.  The  monopoly  of  the  Pratt  Iron  and  Coal  Company  makes  the 
cost  of  coke  high,  although  the  coal  is  mined  by  convicts  whose  wages  are  bare 
.subsistence.  Coke  is  quoted  at  $2.25  per  ton,  but  costs  the  furnace  men  in  quan- 
tities nearer  $2,  whereas,  with  a  fair  profit  to  the  coal  mines,  it  should  not  cost 
over  $1.25  to  $1.50.  Connellsville  coke  is  quoted  in  Pennsylvania  at  $1.50  f.  o.  b., 
.uid  has  been  as  low  as  $1.15.  The  figures  of  Southern  production  are  criticised 
is  making  insufficient  allowance  for  repairs  and  replacements,  interest  and 
Adequate  profit,  and  there  is  probably  some  force  in  these  criticisms.  But 
hiking  all  these  allowances  into  consideration,  it  is  evident  that  pig  can  be  made 
there  profitably  at  between  $10  to  $11  per  ton.  The  laborers  at  these  furnaces 
uid  coke  ovens,  pets  of  "protection,"  are  paid  75  to  90  cents,  a  few  $1  per  day  ; 
out,  taking  the  average  wages  paid  according  to  the  census  report-of  1880,  when 
the  coke  chargers  got  $1.49  and  the  laborer  $1.27  per  day,  and  the  labor  figures 
A-ere  given  as  labor  for  mining  1.6  tons  of  coal  38  cents,  coking  43J>£  cents,  with 
nn  average  consumption  of  1%  tons  of  coke  per  ton  of  iron ;  for  mining  ore  30 
rents  to  $1  per  ton  ;  limestone  never  over  40  cents  per  ton  —  Mr.  Vinton  figures 
the  labor  cost  in  a  ton  of  iron  at  labor  in  coke  75  cents  to  $1;  labor  in  ore  60 
cents  to  $2;  labor  in  limestone  20  cents  to  40  cents ;  labor  at  furnace  $1  to  $1.50, 
a  total  of  $3.05  to  $4.90.  All  the  rest  of  the  cost  of  pig  is  cost  of  transportation 
of  materials  (partly  labor),  royalty  to  the  mine-owner,  interest  and  profit  to  the 
capitalist.  The  landholder,  who  has  perhaps  bought  land  of  the  government  at 
$1  to  $5  per  acre,  is  the  great  beneficiary  of  the  protective  system.  Next  to  him 
come  the  transportation  companies,  with  their  watered  stocks  and  monopoly 
tariffs.  It  is  their  partnership  which  causes  the  $25  shares  of  Lake  Superior 
mines  to  sell  at  $300,  while  laborers  get  $1  a  day  or  less. 

From  Secretary  Manning's  Report. 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  179 

stands  guard  at  the  frontier  and  prevents  foreign  ore  from 
being  brought  in  in  competition  with  American  ore. 

It  is  for  the  sole  benefit  of  the  handful  of  owners  of  ore- 
lands  and  the  powerful  railroad  magnates,  that  our  iron 
and  steel  industries  are  prevented  from  supplying  Mexico, 
South  America  and  the  rest  of  the  world  with  their  mis- 
cellaneous fabrics,  and  our  workingmen  are  robbed  of 
steady  and  lucrative  employment. 

There  is  but  little  difference  in  the  actual  cost  of  pro- 
duction between  England  and  the  United  States,  which  is 
proven  by  the  fact  that  during  the  crisis  of  1879  Pitts- 
burgh manufacturers  were  enabled  to  sell  iron  as  low,  or 
nearly  so,  as  it  was  sold  in  England.  Mr.  John  P.  Verrie, 
representing  the  Philadelphia  Iron  and  Steel  Company, 
testified  before  the  Tariff  Commission,  "that  even  to-day 
(1882)  Pittsburgh  is  selling  iron  in  the  East  at  $10  a  ton 
less  than  the  same  iron  can  be  imported  for.  So  that  it 
is  not  a  question  of  competition  any  further  with  foreign 
manufacturers  ;  it  is  a  question  of  home  competition,  and 
I  do  not  think  it  is  a  sectional  issue ;  I  think  it  is  a 
national  issue. 

"  Pittsburgh  has  very  many  natural  advantages.  She  is 
located  on  a  river  which  takes  her  products  to  the 
extreme  West  and  Southwest  at  a  very  cheap  rate ;  she 
has  the  best  coal  at  a  cheap  rate ;  she  has  gas  without  any 
cost,  and  iron  of  the  best  quality,  which  enables  her,  in 
mixtures  with  our  own  inferior  ores,  to  make  as  good  iron 
as  any  manufacturers  can  make,  and,  with  the  cheap  trans- 
portation which  she  has,  she  is  enabled  to  transport  iron 
to  the  Atlantic  coast  and  deliver  it  cheaper  than  the  Eng- 
lish or  the  New  England  manufacturers  can.  I  therefore 
come  here  to  ask  protection  for  the  eastern  coast,  although 
that  may  seem  an  anomaly.     The  Allegheny  Mountains 


180  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

are  a  protection  to  the  West  as  against  eastern  compe- 
tition. The  West  has  an  unlimited  territory  increasing- 
all  the  time,  while  we  have  a  very  narrow  belt  on  the 
Atlantic  coast.  Therefore  I  claim  protection  from  Pitts- 
burgh !" 

In  Germany  and  Spain  mineral  lands  belong  to  the 
government.  The  mine  operator  pays  a  royalty  of  two 
cents  a  ton  in  the  former  and  three  cents  in  the  latter 
country.  The  American  owner  of  ore  lands,  having 
purchased  his  land  from  the  government  at  $1.25  per 
acre,  exacts  a  royalty  from  the  furnace-man,  an  interest 
upon  a  valuation  of  $10,000  per  acre,  much  in  the  same 
fashion  as  our  western  lumber  lords  raise  the  value  of 
their  "  stumpage." 

The  cost  of  making  pig-iron  in  England  averages  about 
$9.00  a  ton.  If  the  expenses  of  freight  and  commission 
of  about  $4.00  per  ton  is  added,  the  American  producer 
would  be  amply  protected.  If  iron  ore  were  put  upon 
the  free  list  the  owners  of  ore  land  could  not  monop- 
olize the  output,  but  would  be  compelled  to  accept  a 
reasonable  royalty.  It  must  not  be  supposed,  by  any 
means,  that  the  placing  of  iron  ore  upon  the  free  list 
would  cause  the  American  iron  market  to  be  flooded  with 
foreign  ore ;  it  would  only  serve  as  a  preventive  against 
the  inordinate  charges  of  our  iron  and  railroad  lords. 

Our  importations  of  iron  ore  have  been  about  five 
hundred  thousand  tons  annually,  and  if  wre  had  to  import 
the  nine  million  tons  Ave  need  for  consumption,  there  would 
not  be  vessels  enough  to  carry  it,  and  the  freight  rates 
would  be  prohibitive.  The  taking  off  of  the  tax  on  iron  ore 
and  on  pig-iron  would  injure  no  interest,  but  would  reduce 
the  enormous  profits  now  made  by  a  few  operators,  while 


EFFECT   OF    PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  181 

it  would  infuse  a  wonderful  impetus  to  the  various  branches 
of  our  iron  industries  and  start  up  new  enterprises  all  over 
the  country.  The  line  of  exports  of  our  finished  iron  and 
steel  goods,  which  are  confined  to-day  to  tools,  engines, 
agricultural  implements,  house-builders"  hardware  and  a 
few  others,  would  immediately  be  extended  to  the  more 
bulky  articles  of  iron  castings,  coarsely-finished  machin- 
ery, anvils,  sledge-hammers,  and  other  heavy  products  of 
our  iron  and  steel  industries.  This  increased  demand,  of 
manufactured  goods  would  naturally  require  more  labor- 
ers, increase  their  wages,  and  by  being  steadily  employed, 
their  prosperity  and  consequently  their  contentment 
would  be  insured.* 

*"An  active  business  experience  of  nearly  forty  years,  thirty  of  which  have 
been  occupied  in  manufacturing',  a  fair  actual  acquaintance  with,  and  knowl- 
edge of,  the  natural  resources  of  tins  country  and  of  most  of  the  countries  of 
Europe,  an  examination  and  comparison  of  the  methods  of  the  United  States 
and  European  manufacturers  and  their  respective  facilities,  advantages  and 
disadvantages,  has  convinced  me  that  the  United  States  of  America  is  fully 
capable  of  taking  and  maintaining-  an  independent  position  as  a  manufacturing 
nation,  and  that  her  manufacturers,  if  left  to  fight  their  own  battles  against  all 
comers,  in  a  free-trade  field,  need  no  protection  whatever  against  foreign  man- 
ufacturers. 

"The  fact  that  they  are  now  able  to  sell,  to  some  little  extent,  their  manu- 
factured goods  in  neutral.' countries  against  the  competition  of  the  manufact- 
urers of  Europe,  is  evidence  of  what  they  might  do  if  relieved  of  the  incubus 
of  an  enormous  customs  tax  on  the  foreign  raw  mater iaU  they  use,  and  the  corre- 
spondingly high  price  of  American  raw  materials  that  then  o/re  compelled  to  use. 

"Under  our  tariff  system,  which  is  called  'the  pi-otective  system,'  an 
attempt  is  made  from  time  to  time  to  adjust  the  duty  on  the  various  articles  of 
foreign  manufacture  to  conform  to  the  supposed  necessities  of  the  American 
manufacturer  of  similar  articles,  and  as  the  duty  on  one  article  is  raised  to 
meet  the  necessities,  or  more  likely  to  protect  the  ignorance  and  unthrift  of  the 
American  manufacturer,  other  manufacturers,  imagining  that  the  cost  of 
making  their  own  goods,  or  the  cost  of  the  living  of  themselves  and  their 
employes,  has  been  increased  by  this  advance  in  the  tariff,  combine  and  obtain 
an  advance  in  the  tariff  on  the  classes  of  goods  made  by  them. 

"  Then  the  producers  of  the  raw  material  think  there  is  an  opportunity  for 
them  to  get  the  duty  on  their  products  raised,  and  so  the  figures  have  climbed 
upward  by  a  step  here  and  another  there,  and  then  a  good  pull  altogether,  till 
we  have  built  a  tariff  wall  around  us  that  not  only  keeps  nearly  all  foreign  raw 
material  and  manufactured  goods  out  of  the  country,  but  keeps  nearly  all  of 
our  manufactured  goods  at  home,  and  so  circumscribes  our  market,  dwarfs 


182  THE    PROTECTIVE    TAEIFF. 


COTTON  AND  WOOL. 


Next  to  iron,  cotton  and  wool  are  unquestionably  the 
most  important  crude  materials  entering  into  the  manu- 
facture of  finished  articles. 

On  the  subject  of  cotton,  which  is  untaxed,  there  is 
only  this  to  say,  that  in  spite  of  the  restrictive  tariff  which 
enhances  the  price  of  every  article  which  enters  into  their 
business,  some  lines  of  American  cotton  goods  are  now 
successfully  sold  in  China,  and  even  in  England,  in  com- 
petition with  English  "  pauper  "-made  goods,  and  but  for 
the  voracious  appetite  of  the  manufacturing  corporations 
of  New  England,  which  insist  upon  their  pound  of 
flesh,  there  is  not  a  cotton  fabric  of  any  kind,  made  in 
this  country,  that  would  not  successfully  compete  with 
England  in  the  world's  market. 

American  commerce,  and  suppresses  nearly  all  possible  material  for  commerce, 
except  the  products  of  our  soil  that  may  be  wanted  abroad.  Is  it  not  time  now 
that  we  all  take  a  few  long  steps  downward  —  nearer  terra  flrma  —  and  get  into 
a  condition  to  have  a  foreign  commerce  ? 

"  This  country  is  so  rich  in  fertile  lands,  on  which  can  be  cheaply  raised  all 
kinds  of  produce  necessary  for  the  sustenance  of  man  and  beast,  and  all  the 
raw  materials  necessary  for  clothing,  it  is  so  rich  in  the  ores  of  all  the  use- 
ful metals  and  in  the  coal  to  convert  them,  that  surely  no  product  of  the  soil, 
nor  of  animals  supported  on  the  product  of  the  soil,  nor  mineral  ore,  nor  metal 
from  the  ore,  can  need  the  protection  of  a  revenue  tariff.  These  raw  materials 
are  placed  by  a  kind  Providence  almost  in  the  producer's  hands,  and  fortunate 
should  they  esteem  themselves  who  have,  at  so  little  cost,  become  the  owners 
of  the  fertile  lands  and  rich  mines  from  whicli  these  raw  materials  are  so  easily 
obtained. 

"The  workingman  certainly  needs  no  protection  on  his  labor,  provided  lie 
can  gethis  food  and  clothing  and  all  the  articles  that  enter  into  the  subsistence 
of  himself  and  family  free  from  the  high  prices  influenced  or  induced  by  a  high 
tariff,  and  even  if  he  does  need  protection  he  cannot  get  it,  because  if  the 
laborer  tries  to  make  a 'corner' in  the  price  of  labor,  importations  of  foreign 
labor  come  in  without  limit  and  duty  free. 

"  With  raiv  materials  free  of  duty,  labor  free  of  duty,  and  freights  and  other 
expenses  on  a  free-trade  basis,  the  manufacturer  will  need  no  protective  tariff, 
but,  I  am  sure,  cannot  only  hold  all  he  ought  to  hold  of  the  home  market,  but 
obtain  a  large  share  of  the  foreign  markets."  —  Testimony  of  I.  B.  Sargent,  home- 
manufacturer  of  cutlery,  before  United  States  Tariff  Commission. 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  183 

This  condition  of  affairs  was  well  understood  in  the 
"trade"  as  early  as  1S82.  While  the  western  cotton 
manufacturers  uniformly  urged  upon  the  United  States 
Tariff  Commission  radical  reductions  in  the  duties  of  all 
lines  of  cotton  goods,  the  New  England  corporations  kept 
perfectly  still,  not  one  of  their  representatives  appearing 
before  the  commission.  This  silence  was  maintained  for 
the  sole  reason,  that,  while  a  large  increase  of  duties  could 
not  be  had,  a  controversy  upon  the  subject  before  the 
Tariff  Commission  would  furnish  the  public  with  informa- 
tion reserved  for  their  own  circle.  This  reticence  on  the 
part  of  so  important  a  New  England  manufacturing 
interest  caused  Commissioner  Kenner  (ultra- protectionist), 
at  the  close  of  their  labors  uneasily  to  remark  : 

"  Can  you  tell  me  why  it  is  that  in  regard  to  a  great 
industry  like  the  manufacture  of  cotton  goods  we  have 
not  heard  from  any  of  the  manufacturers,  or  why  they 
have  not  made  any  recommendations  to  us  % " 

As  a  matter  of  course,  Mr.  Kenner  did  not  expect 
"  recommendations "  from  that  quarter,  urging  a  reduc- 
tion of  the  existing  exorbitant  duties  of  from  forty  to 
seventy-five  per  cent,  but  what  he  undoubtedly  thought 
he  had  a  right  to  expect,  was  that  the  New  England 
gentlemen  would  come  before  the  commission,  and  in  a 
general  Avay  warn  them  of  the  dangers  following  a  reduc- 
tion of  duties  on  their  cotton  fabrics.  Such  statements 
as,  "  What  a  calamity  it  would  be  for  the  operatives  in 
our  mills,  now  working  at  the  munificent  remuneration 
of  $250  a  year,  to  place  them  in  competition  with  the 
pauper  labor  of  Europe,"  would  have  justified  the  com- 
mission before  the  American  people  in  their  final  action 
of  raising  the  tariff  on  cotton  goods  ten  per  cent. 

In  speaking  of  the  western  manufacturers,  Mr.  Ken- 


184  THE   PROTECTIVE   TAKIFF. 

ner  acknowledged,  "  that  some  of  them  would  prefer  to 
have  no  tariff  on  their  goods  at  all ;  that  they  had  grown 
strong  enough,  and  were  now  ready,  like  old  England,  if 
they  could  get  their  supplies  where  they  could  buy  them 
cheapest,  to  have  free  trade  with  the  loorld"  " These 
statements,"  he  says,  "are  from  people  who  seem  to 
know  about  these  matters,  and  they  declare  they  are 
willing  to  accept  a  radical  reduction  in  the  tariff  rates 
in  all  their  lines.  I  speak  now,"  Mr.  Kenner  continued, 
"  of  what  is  called  cotton  goods  manufacturers ;  a  repre- 
sentative of  a  cotton  factory  in  Cincinnati  made  a  posi- 
tive assertion  to  that  effect;  and  when  in  St.  Louis  we 
had  similar  suggestions." 

The  price  of  cotton  goods  has  been  kept  within  rea- 
sonable bounds,  through  competition  between  the  home 
manufacturers,  and  therefore  the  American  consumer  is  not 
oppressed  in  the  same  degree  that  he  is  in  the  price  on 
woolen  goods.  Thus  it  will  be  seen,  that  the  protective 
tariff  injuriously  affects  our  cotton  industry  in  general ; 
that  it  is  a  useless  impediment  to  its  full  development, 
and,  to  use  the  language  of  some  of  the  manufacturers 
themselves,  "they  have  grown  strong  enough  and  are 
now  ready,  like  old  England,  if  they  could  get  their  sup- 
plies where  they  could  buy  them  cheapest,~to  have  free 
trade  with  the  world." 

WOOL. 

The  existing  tariff  on  foreign  wool  is  undoubted^ 
the  most  monstrous  contrivance  to  unjustly  oppress  the 
poor,  and  to  cripple  an  important  American  industry,  of 
all  the  protective  enactments  on  the  statute  books.  For 
the  presumed  benefit  of  a  handful  of  wool-growers  in  the 
Eastern  States,  who  persist  in  raising  wool  on  land  worth 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  185 

$100  per  acre,  the  price  of  the  clothing,  bedding  and 
imdercloth  of  sixty  millions  of  people  is  enhanced  from 
forty  to  one  hundred  per  cent ;  not  that  the  increased 
price  of  the  raw  wool  enhances  the  cost  of  the  finished 
article  directly,  but  owing  to  this  unjust  tax  the  wool 
manufacturer  insists  upon  an  enormous  indemnifying  duty 
on  the  foreign  product.* 

It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  this  country  does  not 
raise  half  the  wool  required  for  our  own  wants,  and  but 
for  the  large  unoccupied  areas  of  land  in  Texas  and 
California,  the  per  capita  percentage,  which  has  been 
estimated    at     seventy-six     sheep    to     every     hundred 

*  "  If  you  reduce  the  tariff  on  raw  material,  we  could  stand  a  reduction  of 
duties.  So  long-  as  we  pay  a  high  duty  on  raw  material  we  must  keep  it  on  the 
manufactured  article.  The  manufacturers  are  not  strenuous  for  high  duty 
if  they  could  have  cheaply  the  articles  they  work  with ;  but  if  you  have  to  pay 
duties  on  all  the  articles  you  work  with,  you  have  to  add  your  duties  on  to  the 
price  in  order  to  make  any  profit  to  the  manufacturer.  This  duty  on  wool  has 
averaged  about  twelve  and  a  half  cents  a  pound  for  the  last  five  or  ten  years, 
and  on  greasy  wool  at  that.  It  prohibits  the  purchase  of  wool  in  Buenos  Ayres, 
the  only  wool  imported  at  the  time  the  duty  was  put  on ;  but  that  is  equal  to 
about  fifty  cents  on  wool  enough  to  make  a  pound  of  cloth ;  and  now  if  we 
have  got  to  import  that,  and  we  have  to,  that  regulates  the  price  of  our  home 
wool,  pretty  much.  Then  of  course  our  duty,  in  order  to  protect  the  manu- 
facturer, has  got  to  be  put  on  top  of  that;  and  if  he  pays  a  duty  on  his  indigo, 
oils,  dye-stuffs,  and  everything  of  that  kind,  that  must  be  considered,  and  the 
duty  put  on  the  price." — Chas.  L.  Harding,  wool  manufacturer,  Boston,  Mass., 
before  the  United  States  Senate  Committer. 

"Woolen  goods,  protected  by  one  hundred  per  cent,  hardly  enable  their 
manufacturers  to  make  sufficient  profit  to  save  them  from  bankruptcy.  I  know 
from  my  own  experience  that  goods  manufactured  in  Berlin  undersell  Amer- 
ican-made goods  that  are  protected  by  one  hundred  per  cent  duty.  These  goods 
are  made  of  cloth  which  costs  in  Berlin  seventy-five  cents,  while  the  American 
article  is  sold  for  $1.75.  The  cloth  is  made  of  wool,  which  costs  here  thirty 
cents,  while  the  Berlin  manufacturer  can  use  Australia  wool,  which  costs  one- 
half  the  price.  This  sufficiently  explains  why  we  cannot  compete  against 
Berlin-made  goods.  If,  instead  of  raising  the  tariff  on  manufactured  goods, 
we  were  to  abolish  the  tariff  on  wool,  we  should  be  amply  protected  by  a  tariff 
of  twenty  or  twenty-five  per  cent."— Manufacturer's  Testimony  before  United 
States  Tariff  Commission. 

"  We  would  advise  the  entire  removal  of  the  duties  on  raw  material  and 
dye  stuffs,  feeling  that  no  change  in  the  tariff  would  do  more  to  increase  our 
trade  with  foreign  countries  on  textile  fabrics  and  by  opening  up  this  outlet, 


186  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

inhabitants,  would  be  much  less  even  than  that  of  Europe, 
where  land  is  scarce  and  valuable,  and  is  estimated  at 
sixty-six  sheep  for  every  hundred  inhabitants,  while  in 
South  Africa  the  estimate  is  890  sheep  to  every  hun- 
dred ;  Australia,  2,402,  and  the  Argentine  Republic,  2,580, 
these  latter  countries  having  an  abundance  of  cheap 
lands. 

But  the  most  instructive  and  significant  feature  in  this 
land  question,  in  relation  to  sheep  husbandry,  is  contained 
in  the  statistics  of  the  Agricultural  Department,  giving 
the  respective  decrease  and  increase  of  the  number  of 
sheep  in  the  older  and  more  newly  settled  lands  of  the 

tend  to  prevent  the  great  and  violent  fluctuations  in  prices,  which  are  so  dis- 
astrous to  a  healthy  industrial  growth."— J".  V.  FarwellSc  Co.,  Chicago. 

"From  the  figures  given  you,  which  are  absolutely  correct,  you  will  per- 
ceive that  the  American  manufacturer  is  placed  at  once  under  great  disadvant- 
age in  procuring  his  raw  material,  in  comparison  with  the  German  manufact- 
urer, on  account  of  the  duty  of  thirty  cents  per  pound  and  the  higher  freight  and 
custom-house  charges,  which  compel  him  to  invest  a  cash  capital  of  $50,000  in 
his  stock  of  wool,  etc.,  and  on  which  he  must  pay  interest,  insurance  and  taxes, 
against  only  $20,000,  which  are  necessary  to  stock  same  with  in  Germany  with 
the  same  quantity  and  quality  of  wool,  etc. 

"  Unless  this  duty  on  the  raw  material,  '  wool,'  is  taken  off,  the  woolen  man- 
ufacturer of  America  cannot  compete  with  Europe,  except  in  the  lower  grade 
of  goods,  where  cheap  machinery  and  comparatively  little  manual  labor  is 
used,  because  the  tariff  rates  are  the  same  on  finer  grades  as  on  lower  grades  of 
goods.  It  is  a  fact,  to  which  I  need  hardly  call  your  attention,  that  the  finest 
woolen  goods  are  not  and  cannot  be  manufactured  here  at  remunerative  rates 
or  at  any  profit,  on  account  of  the  pi-esent  tariff."— Alfred  Dodge,  Manufactured 
of  Pearshill,  New  York,  to  Secretary  Manning. 

"  The  first  thing  I  would  do  is  to  equalize  raw  material,  so  that  we  could 
use  it  freely  with  a  great  many  goods  we  do  not  make  now.  If  we  had  free  raw 
material,  we  should  greatly  improve  the  condition  of  our  people."— George  C. 
Jliiliardson,  Representing  the  Cotton  and  Woolmills  at  Lowell,  Laurence,  Saco 
and  Lcwiston. 

"Raw  material  should  be  as  free  as  possible.  Why,  m  this  country,  be- 
fore all  others,  should  it  want  any  protection,  with  such  an  abundance  of  cheap 
and  fertile  land,  great  forests  of  timber,  mines  of  coal  and  iron  almost  on  the 
surface  of  the  ground,  and  thus  they  can  be  and  are  made  ready  for  the  market 
at  less  cost  than  in  any  other  country,  and  as  our  grain  and  cotton  is  cheaper 
and  needs  no  protection,  so  should  all  our  raw  materials  be."  —  D.  I.  Johnston, 
Cotton-Manufacturer  at  Cohoes,  N.  Y. 

"The  effect  of  our  tariff  on  wool  is  to  give  it  to  the  foreign  manufacturer 


Effect  of  protection  on  manufacturers.         187 

United  States.  From  them  it  appears  that  in  1867  there 
were  about  30,000,000  sheep  in  the  States  of  New  York, 
Ohio,  Indiana,  Michigan,  Illinois,  Iowa  and  "Wisconsin. 
In  1877,  after  ten  years  of  protection,  this  number  of 
sheep  had  decreased  to  14,500,000,  or  to  less  than  one-half. 
(While  it  is  not  maintained  that  this  decline  of  sheep- 
raising  was  caused  by  the  tariff,  it  certainly  shows  the 
utter  fallacy  of  the  claim  that  protection  favorably  affects 
this  industry.)  During  this  same  decade  the  number  of 
sheep  in  Texas  and  California  increased  from  less  than 
1,000,000  to  11,500,000,  all  of  which  goes  to  show  that, 
next  to  a  favorable  climate,  an  abundance  of  cheap  lands 

at  least  forty  per  cent  below  the  price  in  this  country,  and  more  than  equivalent 
to  the  whole  possible  difference  in  the  cost  of  labor." — Managers  of  the  Home  Mills 
Company  of  Woolen-Manufactures. 

'The  present  duty  is  partly  specific  and  partly  ad  valorem,  the  specific 
being-  supposed  to  furnish  an  equivalent  for  the  duty  on  the  raw  material,  and 
the  ad  valorem  for  the  other  items  referred  to  above.  To  make  the  duty 
entirely  specific  would  either  overtax  the  poor  man's  cloth  or  admit  the  rich 
man's  broadcloth  with  a  very  small  duty,  neither  of  which  things  should  be 
done.  It  will  therefore  be  absolutely  necessary  to  keep  the  tariff  on  woolens 
about  where  it  is  until  such  time  as  the  western  farmers  learn  by  experience  that 
tin:  liiijli  tariff  on  wool  does  not  benefit  them,  and  become  ready  to  let  in  wool  at  a 
low  tariff." — Chas.Merriman,  Woolen-Manufacturer,  Providence,  H.  I. 

"  The  duty  on  wool  does  not  help  the  wool-grower.  The  effect  is  to  cause 
the  importation  of  fabrics,  whereas,  if  imported  in  the  raw  state,  much  domes- 
tic wool  would  be  used  mixed  with  the  foreign,  and  our  home  growers  would 
furnish  at  least  half  the  wool  for  the  goods  now  made  wholly  of  foreign 
wools. 

"  Free  wool  would  also  enable  our  idle  mills  to  start  up,  and  we  could,  after 
a  short  time,  export  some  of  our  goods,  making  a  market  for  our  home-grown 
wools. 

"  Free  wool  would  raise  prices  abroad  to  a  point  that  would  make  the  cost 
here  such  as  to  enable  our  growers  to  compete  favorably  on  the  qualities 
adapted  to  their  several  localities. 

"It  would  give  them  a  steady  market,  and  tend  to  bring  them  in  direct 
communication  with  the  consumers,  saving  the  profits  of  speculators.  It  is 
now  seldom  the  case  that  the  grower  gets  the  advantage  of  an  advance  in 
market  values. 

"  It  would  be  of  more  benefit  to  the  wool-grower  than  to  the  manufacturer, 
as  it  would  start  up  and  increase  the  machinery,  and  make  a  demand  for  the 
wool. 

"  It  would  give  the  grower  what  he  most  needs,  customers  and  competition 


188  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

is  the  absolute  requirement  for  the  successful  raising  of 
sheep  on  an  extended  scale. 

"Consequently,  it  will  be  easily  seen,  that,  as  fast 
as  our  western  States  and  territories  grow  in  popula- 
t  ion  thus  fast  the  sheep  are  driven  away.  All  our  lands 
west  of  the  Alleghanies  are  much  too  valuable  for  sheep- 
raismg,  and  there  is  just  as  much  sense  in  the  attempt  of 
an  Ohio  farmer  to  raise  sheep  in  competition  with  the 
shepherds  on  the  La  Plata,  as  would  be  the  effort  of  a 
New-England  agriculturist  to  raise  wheat  upon  his  little 
barren  farm  in  competition  with  the  Minnesota  farmer 
on  his  extended  lands  of  unexampled  fertility.    The  lands 

for  his  wool.  The  home-grown  will  be  used,  so  far  as  suitable,  before  the  im- 
ported.    Onder  the  same  conditions  it  will  have  the  preference. 

"It  would  not  raise  prices  of  the  fabrics  so  as  to  interfere  with  full  con- 
si  i  miition  by  the  laboring  classes."  —  Wool-Manufacturers'1  Reply  to  Secretary 
Manning. 

"  Duties  upon  raw  or  partially  manufactured  materials  that  are  consumed 
by  our  manufacturers,  just  so  far  as  they  raise  the  cost  of  such  materials,  evi- 
dently nullify  the  nominal  protection  by  the  tariff  on  the  finished  goods.  Just 
so  far  they  give  the  foreign  competing  manufacturer  the  advantage  over  our 
own,  and  raise  the  prices  to  the  ultimate  consumer  of  the  goods,  and  so  far  lessen 
his  ability  to  consume. 

''Manufacturers  have  been  induced  to  invest  capital  in  various  enterprises 
under  the  delusion  that  they  had  an  advantage  over  the  foreign  manufacturer 
from  a  'protective'  tariff,  not  knowing  that  the  same  tariff  enhanced  the  cost 
of  their  products  to  an  equal  or  greater  extent.  The  materials  for  many  woolen 
goods  are  thus  increased  in  cost  more  than  the  duty  on  the  finished  fabrics,  and 
the  manufacture  of  such  goods  must  result  in  failure  when  attempted  in  this 
country  so  soon  as  they  experience  the  full  effect  of  foreign  competition. 

"No  manufacture,  unless  it  be  a  monopoly,  can  remain  for  a  long  time 
unduly  profitable  in  this  country.  Competition  is  sure  to  reduce  profits  after 
a  short  time  to  the  average  of  other  business  requiring  equal  capital  and 
skill. 

"Our  house  has  been  in  business  for  more  than  fifty  years,  and  in  all  that 
time,  as  now,  closely  connected  with  and  interested  in  various  manufacturing 
operations.  From  our  observation  and  experience  we  have  learned  that  a  high 
tariff  is  not  of  necessary  "protection,  either  to  the  laborers  or  to  the  employers. 
On  the  contrary,  it  is  usually  a  snare  and  delusion. 

"It  is  our  firm  belief  that  the  labor  of  our  country  would  be  better  protected 
and  manufacturers  be  upon  a  much  sounder  basis  with  free  raw  material.  A 
tariff  that,  keeping  the  present  taxes  upon  spirits  and  tobacco,  would  raise  such 
additional  revenue  as  may  1  e  required  for  the  needs  of  the  government  would, 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  189 

east  of  the  Missouri  are  becoming  more  valuable  from 
year  to  year,  and  it  is  only  a  matter  of  time  when  the 
sheep  range  of  Texas  will  also  have  to  make  room  for  our 
regular  diversified  agricultural  industries. 

Of  all  the  "  be  it  enacted,"  there  is  not  one  which  so 
flagrantly  and  forcibly  exposes  the  short-sightedness  of  the 
supposed  beneficiaries,  and  the  "  unfathomable  stupidity  " 
of  our  average  congressman  as  the  protective  enactments 
on  wool.  Don  Quixote,  the  celebrated  Spanish  knight,  in 
trying  to  stop  his  windmill,  was  but  a  miserable  stumper 
when  compared  to  the  enlightened  American  statesman 
of  to-day,    who   thus   attempts   to    interfere    with    the 

in  our  opinion,  be  quite  sufficient."  —  Beech  &  Co.,  Woolen-Manufacturers,  Hart- 
ford, Conn. 

"  In  our  opinion,  the  admission  of  raw  material  free  of  duty  is  a  reform 
in  the  tariff  that  is  imperatively  demanded  by  the  condition  of  manufacturing- 
interest,  and  would  greatly  aid  in  improving  business  generally."  —  George 
Bullock,  representing  Worsted-Mill*  at  Conshohocken,  Pa. 

"If  the  present  duty,  or  any  duty,  are  to  be  levied  on  wool,  then  a  cor- 
responding duty  should  be  put  upon  woolen  fabrics."  —  Geo.  W.  Powell,  Presi- 
dent Amazon  Hosiery  Company,  Michigan  City,  Ind. 

"  To  my  mind  the  first  and  all  important  step,  to  make  a  change  in  the 
tariff,  should  be  the  repeal  of  duties  on  the  raw  materials  of  manufacture.  This 
country  needs  free  wool,  coal,  ores,  jute,  hemp,  lumber,  salt  and  dye-stuffs.  If 
this  would  increase  the  revenues,  then  duties  on  sugar  and  other  necessaries  can 
be  decreased. 

"  Taxes  on  raw  materials  are  inconsistent  even  with  the  theory  of  protec- 
tion. They  shut  us  out  from  all  markets  when  our  own  is  glutted  by  overpro- 
duction.   The  element  of  cost,  by  reason  of  the  tax  on  raw  material,  kills  us. 

"The  taxes  on  the  articles  named  are  distinctly  disadvantageous  to  the 
people  of  Philadelphia,  eastern  Pennsylvania  and  adjacent  States.  The  taxes 
on  iron  ore  and  coal  operate  as  a  means  of  perpetuating  discriminations  against 
this  city  in  the  freight  charges  by  the  railroads.  The  government  gets  from 
these  but  a  small  revenue,  but  the  exactions  of  the  railroad  companies  amount 
to  millions  a  year."—  Wrn.  Singerly,  of  Philadelphia. 

"  It  is  plain  to  me,  as  it  has  been  expressed  in  your  pamphlet,  that  the  duty 
on  wool  handicaps  the  American  woolen-manufacturers ;  therefore,  beingasyou 
say  the  best  judges  of  their  own  intei'csts,  why  not  carry  out  the  principle  to  the 
end  and  say,  Ave  are  opposed  to  any  duty  on  wool,  and  ask  for  its  abolishment? 
Act  consistently,  and  do  what  your  own  intelligence  tells  you  to  be  right.  Now, 
there  is  another  thing  which  I  have  noticed  for  some  months  back,  and  that  is, 
that  from  one  to  three  thousand  enses  of  manufaci  ured  cotton  goods  have  been 
shipped  weekly  to  the  ports  of  London,  Liverpool  and  Glasgow.    How  is  it  that 


190  the  protective  tariff. 

immutable  laws  of  exchange.  It  is  of  no  consequence 
to  him  that  the  climate,  the  soil,  the  price  of  land  and 
of  labor  in  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania  are  not  adapted  for 
wool-raising  on  a  grand  scale,  and  that,  to  overcome  these 
unfavorable  conditions,  great  sacrifices  have  to  be  made. 
He  seems  to  contemplate  with  supreme  indifference  this 
fact,  as  well  as,  the  fact  that  the  sixty  million  inhabit- 
ants of  the  United  States  might  the  more  comfortably 
clothe  themselves  with  one-half  the  money  they  now  pay, 
if  they  were  permitted  to  huy  the  wool  they  need  where 
the  soil  and  climate  are  favorable  to  wool-raising, 
and  where  land  and  labor  is  cheap.     The  idea  does  not 

the  American  cotton-manufacturer  can  exporthis  products  to  an  English  mark- 
et and  sell  at  a  profit?  And  they  must  do  it,  or  they  would  quit  sending  them. 
Does  not  this  same  American  cotton  manufacturer  have  to  compete  in  the  same 
American  labor  market  from  which  the  American  woolen-manufacturer  has  to 
gx't  his  supply  of  labor,  and  also  the  American  farmer  has  to  get  his  labor  with 
which  lie  has  to  raise  his  wheat,  corn,  tobacco,  pork,  beef,  dairy  products,  and 
ex  |  h  at  them  to  a  foreign  market,  and  sell  in  competition  with  the  half-civilized 
labor  of  the  Eastern  world  or  the  pauper  labor  of  Europe,  even  the  serf  labor  of 
Russia,  which,  although  not  serfs  to-day,  I  am  told,  are  not  much  better  off? 
When  the  American  cotton-manufacturer  can  sell  his  products  in  the  English 
markets  in  competition  with  the  English  pauper  labor,  and  pay  the  high  Ameri- 
can price  for  labor  to  produce  his  products,  does  he  want  any  protection?  Sup- 
pose, for  illustration,  that  the  American  woolen-manufacturer  could  go  into  the 
cheapest  wool-markets  of  the  world,  just  the  same  as  the  American  cotton-man- 
ufacturer gets  his  cotton  as  cheap  as  any  manufacturer,  could  not  the  Ameri- 
can woolen  manufacturer  produce  equally  cheap  woolen  goods?  If  not,  will 
you  please  give  me  the  reason  why?  Now  let  us  take  the  specific  duty  on  wool, 
which  you  say  must  be  added  to  the  price  of  American  woolen  "goods  to  over- 
come the  specific  duty  now  collected  on  wool.  We  will  put  it  at  forty  cents, 
while  the  pamphlet  says  it  will  require  forty-six  and  three-quarters  cents 
per  pound  to  put  the  American  manufacturer  on  an  equal  footing  with  the 
European  manufacturer.  The  census  report  of  1880  puts  the  woolen  product 
of  our  country  at  something- over  $200,000,000  per  annum.  While  present  at  a 
banquet  given  l>y  the  National  Association  of  Woolen-Manufacturers  some 
few  years  back  at  the  Continental  Hotel,  in  Philadelphia,  the  president  of  the 
association,  in  giving  an  account  of  the  woolen-manufacturing-  interests  of 
America,  said  the  products  per  annum  at  that  time  were  about  $293,000,000. 
Now,  let  us  take  the  census  report  and  say  it  is  correct  of  §200,000,000,  and  say 
the  manufactured  goods  cost  $1.50  per  pound  (which  is  a  very  high  average  of 
American-manufactured  woolens),  it  would  make  about  13-1,000,000  pouads, 
aud  add  to  it  the  specific  duty  of  forty  cents  per  pound.    This  will  add  to  the 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  191 

seem  to  find  a  lodgment  in  his  shallow  head,  that  the 
fellows  who  raise  the  cheap  wool  of  Australia,  South 
America  and  South  Africa  might  be  in  need  of  some  of 
our  manufactured  goods,  or,  if  not  in  need  now,  might  be 
induced,  by  and  by,  to  exchange  with  us  for  our  products 
their  cheap  wool  (for  which  they  have  no  earthly  use). 
This  condition  of  things  has  been  a/ptly  illustrated  by  Mr. 
Edward  Atkinson,  the  great  statistician,  in  his  pamphlet 
on  the  "  Collection  of  Kevenue." 

"  The  Kaffir  of  South  Africa  was  formerly  a  savage 
warrior ;  he  is  now  a  peaceful  shepherd  in  whom  some  of 
the  desires  of  civilized  life  have  been  developed.     How 

cost  of  the  American  -woolen-goods  pi*oduct  about  $54,000,000.  In  addition  to 
this  we  import  annually,  say  $50,000,000  worth  of  wool  and  woolens,  the  duties 
on  which,  at  an  average  of  say  seventy-five  per  cent,  would  be  $37,500,000.  The 
pamphlet  claims  that  the  woolen-manufacturer  is  entitled  to  an  ad  valorem  duty 
of  thirty-five  per  cent  to  overcome  the  cheap  pauper  labor  put  into  the  manu- 
facture of  woolen  goods  in  Europe.  Now,  this  ail  virion  urn  duty  will  add  to 
the  selling  price  of  the  $200,000,000  worth  of  American-manufactured  woolens 
another  $50,000,000.  If  we  take  the  $54,000,000  of  specific  duty  added  to  the 
woolen  goods  product  of  America  and  say  two-thirds  of  the  duties  collected  on 
imported  wools  and  woolens,  we  will  find  what  it  costs  the  American  consumers 
of  woolen  goods  to  protect  the  handful  of  persons  called  wool-growers.  The 
two  items  will  amount  to  about  $95,000,000,  or  very  nearly  $2  each  for  every 
man,  woman  and  child  in  the  United  States  in  1880.  Now,  when  you  add  the 
ad  valorem  duty,  or  what  it  adds  to  the  cost  of  all  woolen  goods  consumed  in 
the  United  States,  it  will  make  another  $70,000,000,  or  when  all  the  exactions  that 
are  taken  from  the  consumers  of  woolens  in  the  United  States,  over  $150,000,000, 
or  about  $3  each  for  every  individual  in  our  country.  Now,  there  are  engaged 
in  the  woolen  and  worsted  interests  of  the  United  States  about  120,000  persons  of 
all  ages  and  sexes;  these,  along  with  a  probably  much  less  number  of  persons 
called  wool-growers,  are  those  who  extract  from  the  pockets  of  the  9,000,000  farm- 
ers and  the  many  other  millions  of  tradesmen,  working-men,  professional 
men  and  men  engaged  in  transportation  who  go  to  make  the  grand  aggregate 
of  the  American  people,  who  are  taxed  as  above  to  proted  Less  than  a  quarter 
of  a  million  people  engaged  in  wool-growing  and  woolen-manufacturing.  How 
long  would  the  American  citizen  stand  such  a  tax  for  such  a  purpose  were  ita 
direct  tax '?  And  yet  they  just  as  surely  pay  it  as  though  the  tax-gatherer  came 
around  and  collected  it  directly.  Four  circular  letter  says:  'The  object  for 
which  the  pamphlet  was  written,  viz.,  preserving  the  foundation  rock  of  our 
prosperity  as  wool-manufacturers,  the  present  woolen  tariff.1  If  it  is  the  foun- 
dation rock  it  must  be  a  very  slippery  one,  and  weas  woolen-manufacturers  occa- 
sionally get  off  the  rock  and  out  into  deep  water,  and  some  occasionally  get 


192  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

has  this  come  about  ?  By  the  desire  of  the  civilized  men 
of  Europe  and  America  for  a  kind  of  wool  which  the 
climate  and  soil  of  South  Africa  will  produce.  It 
happens  that,  upon  the  hills  of  South  Africa,  wool  can  be 
raised  with  no  labor  except  that  of  the  shepherd  to  tend 
the  sheep  and  the  annual  shearing,  but  the  wool  is  abso- 
lutely useless  in  that  climate.  On  the  other  hand,  wheat, 
tobacco,  butter,  cheese,  iron-ware  and  tools  cannot  be 
raised  or  made  there  at  all.  "What  has  happened  from 
these  conditions  ?  The  first  settlers  tempted  the  Kaffirs 
to  become  shepherds  by  offering  them  good  bread,  butter, 
cheese,  iron  and  other  luxuries  hitherto  unknown  to  them, 
but  yet  real  necessities  for  the  full  development  of  the 
manhood  in  them.  Europe  and  America  took  their  wool 
and  gave  them  the  wheat. 

"  But  now  the  United  States  says,  or  rather  Ohio  says, 
We  can  raise  all  this  wool.  True  ;  but  instead  of  expend- 
ing only  the  labor  of  a  Kaffir,  who  can  do  nothing  else, 
we  must  build  great  barns  to  protect  our  sheep  in  our 
cold  winter,  we  must  employ  farmers  to  raise  hay  and 
roots  to  feed  them,  and  we  must  expend  two  days'  labor 
of  a  civilized  man,  where  the  half-civilized  Kaffir  need 
expend  but  one ;  yet  we  ought  to  be  protected  in  our 

drowned,  and  the  great  mass  at  times  make  very  narrow  escapes.  Let  any  per- 
son running  a  woolen-mill  from  1873  to  1877  ask  himself  why  it  was  during  that 
time  that  at  least  one-third  of  the  woolen-machinery  of  the  country  was  idle ; 
and  it  was  the  same  with  every  other  interest  at  that  time.  It  was  said  that 
there  was  a  million  of  men  tramping  from  one  end  of  the  country  to  the  other, 
willing  to  work,  but  could  find  none  to  do.  Where  was  the  rock  foundation  at 
that  time  ?  Let  us  look  at  a  later  date,  from  1883  to  1885.  Have  we  not  wit- 
nessed a  similar  state  of  things?  What  had  become  of  the  rock  of  prosperity  at 
this  time?  Why  were  so  many  woolen-mills  idle?  Why  was  the  woolen-mill 
bought  by  Mr.  Ayres  in  Massachusetts  for  $225,000,  which  was  said  to  have  cost 
over  a  million  of  dollars?  What  had  become  of  its  capital?  That  mill  must 
certainly  have  gotten  off  the  foundation  rock  of  prosperity."—  Win.  Dean, 
Woolen-Manufacturer,  Newark,  Del.,ieply  to  National  Association  of  Wool-Man- 
ufacturers. 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  193 

labor  ;  we,  the  educated,  civilized  men  of  Ohio  and  Ver- 
mont and  Massachusetts  need  to  be  protected  against  the 
poor,  half  civilized  creature  —  we  are  afraid  of  him.  God 
has  given  him  more  sunshine  than  us,  and  if  he  advances 
we  shall  be  degraded.  Suppose  Europe  were  equally 
afraid  of  the  poor  Kaffir,  and  protected  itself  against  his 
wool ;  what  would  become  of  it  ? 

"ISTo  one  would  give  him  wheat  or  any  commodity  for 
it ;  he  cannot  eat  or  wear  it,  and  it  is  the  only  thing  he 
can  raise.  If  he  cannot  sell  it  he  must  cease  work,  cease 
progress,  relapse  into  barbarism  —  all  the  missionaries  in 
creation  couldn't  save  him  ;  yet,  if  protection  against  the 
Kaffirs  wool  is  good  for  America  it  is  good  for  Europe, 
and  ought  to  be  adopted." 

Which  is  the  greater  "Kaffir"  of  the  two,  the  native 
of  South  Africa,  who  is  trying  to  adapt  himself  to  modern 
progress  and  civilization,  or  the  American  congressman  ? 

But  how  about  the  Ohio  wool-grower  ? 

Mr.  Atkinson  thus  answers  the  question :  "  Twenty 
cents'  worth  of  wheat  will  buy  of  the  Kaffir  a  pound  of 
wool.  The  Ohio  farmer  can  furnish  twenty  cents'  worth 
of  wheat,  we  will  say,  by  half  an  hour's  labor ;  but  a 
pound  of  wool  will  cost  him  a  whole  hour's  labor,  or  forty 
cents. 

"  Now,  if  you  put  a  revenue  duty  of  fifteen  cents  on 
the  wool  raised  by  the  Kaffir,  it  will  still  come,  asjts 
total  cost  in  the  United  States  will  still  be  only  thirty-five 
cents.  The  Ohio  farmer  will  still  make  wheat  to  exchange 
for  it,  only  we  shall  get  less  wool  for  a  bushel  of  wheat ;  but 
if  you  impose  a  duty  which  involves  any  incidental  pro- 
tection or  any  other  kind  of  protection,  it  must  be  over 
twenty  cents,  so  as  to  raise  the  cost  of  the  Kaffir  wool  to 
over  forty  cents.     Suppose  you  put  the  duty  at  twenty- 


194  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

five  cents,  then  the  Ohio  farmer  is  protected,  and  can 
make  it  for  less  than  its  cost  plus  the  duty ;  the  Ohio 
farmer  gives  up  raising  wheat,  but  expends  twice  the 
labor  on  wool ;  commerce  with  the  Kaffir  ceases  ;  woolen 
cloths  cost  double ;  the  government  has  no  revenue  ;  the 
civilized  man  has  put  his  two  hours'  labor  against  the 
Kaffir's  one,  and  by  means  of  protection  has  won  the 
game ;  the  Kaffir  relapses  into  barbarism,  and  that  is  the 
end  of  it ;  but  is  the  civilized  man  any  better  off  than  he 
was  before  ?  He  has  now  to  pay  a  direct  tax  for  the 
support  of  the  government  and  has  less  time  to  work  it 
out  than  he  had  before." 

And  is  it  not  a  matter  of  easy  calculation,  that  for 
every  dollar  the  farmer  profits  by  this  protection  on  his 
wool,  he  pays  $2  in  the  increased  price  of  his  clothing, 
farming  utensils  and  household  furniture,  on  account 
of  the  tariff,  and  that,  consequently,  he  is  a  loser  in 
the  end  ? 

The  import  duty  on  wool  is  divided  into 

Class  I.  Clothing-wool,  ten  cents  per  pound,  if  the 
value  is  thirty-two  cents  or  less,  and  twelve  cents  per 
pound,  if  the  value  exceeds  thirty-two  cents.  In  addition, 
ten  per  cent  on  its  value. 

Class  II.  Fine  combing- wool,  and  alpaca  and  goat's 
hair  are  taxed  in  the  same  ratio  as  the  above. 

Class  III.  Known  as  carpet  wool,  two  and  one-half 
cents  per  pound,  if  the  value  is  twelve  cents  a  pound,  or 
less,  and  five  cents  a  pound  if  the  value  exceeds  twelve 
cents. 

The  duty  on  washed  clothing  -  wool  is  doubled  and 
is  trebled  on  scoured  wool.  This  duty  is  almost  prohib- 
itive, and  not  only  excludes  our  manufacturers  from 
foreign  markets,  but  actually  doubles  the  price  of  the  bet- 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  195 

ter  kind  of  clothing  to  the  American  consumer.  This 
class  of  wool  is  too  expensive  to  be  used  in  the  manufact- 
ure of  the  cheaper  class  of  goods,  and,  in  order  to  supply 
the  enormous  demand  for  this  kind  of  clothing,  our  man- 
ufacturers are  compelled  to  resort  to  so-called  "substi- 
tutes; a  respectable  expression  for  the  word  "  shoddy." 

"  Shoddy  "  is  made  from  old  rags,  of  which  large  quan- 
tities are  imported.  All  our  ready-made  clothing,  the 
principal  wearing  apparel  of  the  American  farmer  and 
working-man,  is  wholly  or  partially  manufactured  out  of 
this  miserable  stuff. 

A  }rear  ago,  The  Breeders  Gazette  of  this  city,  one  of 
the  leading  agricultural  papers  of  the  country,  contained 
the  following  lucid  expose  of  this  outrageous  swindle : 

"  Shoddy  is  used  to  the  extent  of  more  than  one-third 
of  the  weight  of  the  wool  clip  of  the  United  States.  But 
how  can  this  be  avoided?  There  is  not  more  than  half 
enough  clothing-wool  raised  in  the  United  States  for  mak- 
ing the  goods  consumed.  The  other  half  must  be  procured 
elsewhere,  or  half  the  present  wear  must  be  of  old  clothes 
without  being  manufactured.  Under  the  present  tariff, 
without  the  use  of  these  substitutes,  the  clothing  of  the 
poorer  classes  and  those  of  moderate  means  would  cost 
fully  double  present  prices.  The  manufacturer  must  use 
such  material  as  he  can  get  for  making  the  fabrics  his 
customers  require.  He  would  prefer  to  use  all  clean  wool. 
It  would  be  much  easier  to  make  his  goods  with  this  than 
with  any  other  material.  But  the  tariff  sa}Ts  you  shall  not 
have  the  wool  without  you  pay  fifty  to  one  hundred  per 
cent  more  for  it  than  it  costs  }Tour  competitors  in  other 
countries.  If  you  use  shoddy  or  other  substitutes,  you  can 
have  the  same  protection,  by  the  specific  duty  of  thirty-five 
cents  per  pound  on  the  goods,  as  if  you  use  the  finest  silk 


196  THE   PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

and  wool.  In  one  case  the  material  in  a  pound  of  goods  may 
not  cost  more  than  twenty  cents,  and  in  some  others  the 
fine  wool  alone  costs  $1.25,  and  the  silk  nearly  fifty  cents 
additional  for  a  pound  of  the  finished  goods.  The  substi- 
tutes you  can  buy  here  in  almost  any  quantity,  or  import 
by  paying  ten  cents  duty.  The  fine  wool  you  must 
import  in  some  shape,  and  pay  for  duty  alone  much  more 
than  the  specific  duty  on  the  goods.  The  laws  of  trade, 
working  under  the  tariff,  govern  the  shape  in  which  the 
material  is  imported,  and  these  favor  the  use  of  shoddy 
in  our  home  manufactures.  In  other  words  there  is  a 
premium  of  thirty-five  cents  per  pound  offered  by  the 
tariff  for  the  use  of  shoddy  and  other  substitutes  that  we 
can  buy  at  or  below  the  prices  they  cost  in  foreign  coun- 
tries, and  there  is  a  tax,  more  or  less  heavy,  according  to 
the  quality,  upon  the  pure  wool  that  must  be  imported  if 
the  goods  are  to  be  made  in  this  country,  over  and  above 
the  so-called  compensating  duty  on  the  foreign  goods. 
These  are  plain,  naked  facts  that  anyone  can  substan- 
tiate by  going  to  the  proper  sources  for  information.  It 
is  unfortunate  that  this  is  not  more  readily  available,  and 
that  those  who  are  called  upon  to  vote  on  these  questions 
do  not  have  the  time  and  disposition  to  learn  the  exact 
truth." 

"What  do  the  farmers  and  working-men  say  to  this  ? 

Shades  of  the  fathers,  what  a  sight  to  behold !  Our 
farmers  of  the  West,  who  are  supplying  these  "  fellows 
over  the  water"  with  over  $600,000,000  worth  of  cereals 
and  provisions  annually,  standing  about  in  brand-new 
suits,  manufactured  out  of  the  cast-off  woolen  clothing 
of  the  despised  "European  pauper"!  To  be  sure,  this 
miserable  stuff  is  "cheap,"  but  if  poor  quality  and 
wear  is  considered,  it  is  dear  at  any  price. 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  197 

The  other  clay  I  met  the  father  of  three  little  boys, 
whose  daily  earnings  average  about  $1.75  per  day.  After 
pinching  his  household  down  to  the  bare  necessaries  of 
life,  he  managed  to  save  $20  with  which  he  hoped  to 
clothe  his  boys  for  the  winter.  Going  to  one  of  the 
large  ready-made-clothing  houses  down  town,  he  was 
offered  three  suits  at  $6.50  each,  which  he  considered 
very  reasonable.  It  was  to  be  an  agreeable  surprise  to 
the  boys  and  his  wife.  The  latter,  having  had  some 
experience  in  the  clothing  line,  examined  the  yarn  of 
which  the  suits  were  made,  when,  casting  a  despairing 
glance  at  the  father  and  laying  the  bundle  upon  the 
table,  she  exclaimed  :  "  Old  man,  }7ou  have  been  swindled  ; 
this  is  the  purest  shoddy  and  will  not  last  the  boys  a 
month."  "  That  is  the  best  they  had  in  the  store,"  was 
the  reply,  "  and  there  is  no  use  in  trying  to  do  better 
anywhere  else." 

But  this  poor  man's  experience  is  probably  the  experi- 
ence of  many  of  my  readers  ;  the  prophecy  of  that  man's 
wife,  "  that  the  boys'  suits  would  not  last  a  month,"  will 
no  doubt  be  fully  realized. 

This  is  the  kind  of  clothing  the  great  mass  of  the 
American  people  are  compelled  to  purchase,  and  this  is  the 
kind  of  cheajmess  which  Mr.  Eandall  said,  in  his  recent 
speech  at  Atlanta,  "has  been  vouchsafed  us  by protectio?i 
on  wool." 

But  the  utter  recklessness  with  which  this  tariff  legis- 
lation is  carried  on  is  strikingly  exemplified  by  the  duty 
on  wools  of  the  the  third  class,  or  carpet  wools. 

There  is  no  wool  of  this  class  worth  mentioning  raised 
in  the  United  States,  and  over  ninety  per  cent  of  all  that  is 
used  by  our  manufacturers  is  imported.  This  fact  was 
brought  before  the  Tariff  Commission   by  every  manu- 


198  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

facturer  of  woolen  goods,  and  even  by  the  secretary  of 
the  National  Association  of  Wool-Growers.* 

These  remonstrances  notwithstanding,  and  in  spite 
of  these  requests  to  have  this  class  of  wool  put  upon  the 
free  list,  the  commission,  with  the  characteristic  obstin- 
acy of  our  rock-rooted  protectionists,  made  a  reduction 
of  but  half  a  cent  on  a  pound. 

The  duty  on  this  class  of  wool  benefits  no  interest 
whatever,  but  greatly  injures  the  manufacturer  of  carpets, 
who  might,  otherwise,  successfully  compels  with  the  Euro- 
pean carpet-weaver  in  foreign  markets.  This  fact  is 
evidenced  by  the  testimony  of  Mr.  James  Dobson,  an 
extensive  carpet  manufacturer  of  Philadelphia,  who  says : 
"  That  carpets  of  the  same  quality  of  goods  are,  practically, 
as  cheap  here  as  in  England" 

MVedo  not  grow  these  wools,  not  because  we  cannot  produce  them,  but 
because  it  is  unprofitable.  I  have  seen  beautiful  carpet  wools  from  Colorado, 
grown  from  descendants  of  the  Mexican  Churros,  with  fiber  as  white  as 
mohair.  We  do  not  grow  these  wools  for  the  very  simple  reason  that  it  is  more 
profitable  for  the  farmer  to  grow  something  else.  Dr.  Randall  used  to  say : 
"  The  farmer  will  not  grow  rye  when  he  can  grow  wheat."  I  pointed  out  to  an 
experienced  wool-grower  a  picture  of  some  Cheviot  sheep  in  my  office,  and  said 
to  him  :  "  Why  don't  you  try  that  race  of  sheep?  They  are  profitable  in  Scot- 
land.'" His  answer  was,  "It  will  cost  me  no  more  to  grow  Leicesters  or 
Cots  wolds,  and  their  wool  and  carcasses  are  worth  twice  as  much."  The  Churro 
sheep  of  Colorado,  which  I  spoke  of,  will  produce  but  two  or  three  pounds 
of  wool,  while,  improved  by  a  Merino  cross,  the  product  in  wooljs  four  or  five 
pounds.  The  grower  is  all  the  time  doing  his  best  to  breed  away  from  carpet 
wools;  as  a  consequence  he  wants  no  duty  to  encourage  him  to  grow  these 
wools.  He  knows  that  under  no  amount  of  protection  would  the  cultivation  of 
these  wools  be  profitable.—  Secretary  National  Association  of  Wool-Growers. 

Foijfte  above  reasons  we  request  that  carpet  woolsbeputonthefreelist.  We 
believe  that  this  will  be  in  the  interest  of  all  parties,  wool  growers,  wool-manu- 
facturers and  consumers,  and  that  it  is  for  the  general  interest  of  the  whole 
country  that  at  least  all  raw  materials  that  do  not  compete  with  home  products, 
anJ  which  enter  into  important  established  industries,  should  be  admitted  free, 
in  order  that  such  industries  may  receive  the  fullest  practicable  development, 
raid  thus  in  turn  contribute  in  a  thousand  direct  and  indirect  ways  to  the  con- 
sumption of  articles  of  American  growth  and  manufacture.—  Testimony  of  Mr. 
Wm.  Whitman,  representing  the  National  Association  of  Wool-Growers,  before 
the  Tariff  Commission. 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  199 

"What  has  been  said  of  the  effect  of  this  tax  upon  the 
raw  material  of  the  iron,  steel,  cotton  and  wool  industries 
is  applicable  to  almost  every  other  branch  of  manufacture 
and  trade  in  the  country. 

The  hat  industry,  for  instance,  is  hampered  by  an 
average  tax  of  thirty-five  per  cent  upon  its  raw  material, 
very  little  of  which  is  made  in  this  country. 

The  boot  and  shoe  manufacturers  are  crippled  with  a 
tax  of  twenty-five  per  cent  upon  the  calf  skins  they  use. 

The  manufacturers  of  all  kinds  of  copper-ware  are 
compelled  to  pay  a  tax  of  four  cents  per  pound  to  the 
wealthy  copper-mine  owners,  while  these  same  owners 
sell  the  same  article  in  England  for  three  cents  per 
pound  less. 

The  manufacturers  of  lead  pipes  and  of  other  articles 
of  lead,  pay  to  the  lead-mine  operator  the  enormous 
tribute  of  two  cents  on  every  pound  used. 

Nickel,  which  enters  largely  into  the  manufacture  of 
plated  goods,  is  loaded  down  with  the  outrageous  duty  of 
thirty  cents  per  pound. 

From  testimony  given  before  the  Tariff  Commission,  it 
appears  that  almost  the  entire  production  of  nickel  in  this 
country  is  from  one  mine  in  Pennsylvania,  and  I  am  told 
that  the  effect  of  the  duty  on  nickel,  which  is  practically 
a  prohibitory  one,  it  being  so  large  as  to  prevent  the  prof- 
itable importation  of  nickel  at  all,  has  been  to  yield 
an  enormous  profit  to  the  producer  of  this  article  in  Penn- 
sylvania, he  being  the  largest  producer  in  America. 
The  nickel  manufacturers  state  that  the  moment  the  duty 
was  increased  to  its  present  figure,  without  any  increase 
in  the  cost  of  production  at  all,  without  any  increase  in 
wages,  without  any  increase  in  invested  capital,  there  was 
an  immediate  doubling  of  the  price  per  pound  to  the 


200  THE    PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

nickel  plater,  and  that  that  price  has  been  maintained,  and 
to  some  extent  increased,  since  that  time.  This  injustice 
has  been  carried  to  such  an  extent  that  the  Meriden  Bri- 
tannia Company,  which  is  one  of  the  largest  consumers  of 
nickel  in  this  country,  has  been  obliged  to  establish  a 
factory  in  Canada  in  order  to  compete  for  the  foreign 
market. 

The  price  of  nickel  in  this  country  is  such,  owing  to 
the  existing  tariff,  that  our  goods  cannot  be  profitably  ex- 
ported, and  with  all  our  skilled  laborers  and  understand- 
ing of  the  business  (and  we  make  the  best  plated  goods 
that  are  made  in  the  world),  we  cannot  sell  them  in  Eng- 
land, in  South  America,  or  on  the  continent  of  Europe, 
because  we  have  to  pay  so  much  for  our  raw  material. 

The  manufacturer  of  jute  goods  must  pay  a  duty  of 
$15  a  ton,  and  twenty  per  cent  on  its  value.  Hardly  any 
jute  is  raised  in  this  country,  and  although  America  con- 
sumes more  jute  goods  than  any  other  country  in  the 
world,  owing  to  the  exorbitant  tax  on  the  raw  material,  it 
makes  but  one  forty-second  of  the  production  of  England. 

But  the  tax  which  has  inflicted  the  most  irreparable 
injury  upon  the  whole  country  is  the  duty  on  the  raw  mate- 
rials which  enter  into  the  construction  of  a  ship.  It 
amounts  to  forty -three  per  cent  on  the  average.  While  the 
United  States  once  stood  at  the  head  of  the  ship-building 
nations  of  the  world,  that  tax  has  closed  our  ship-yards, 
thrown  sixty  thousand  American  sailors  out  of  employ- 
ment, or-  compelled  them  to  navigate  foreign  ships,  and 
has  driven  the  American  flag  from  the  high  seas.* 

*  Take  off  the  tariff  on  Nova  Scotia  coal  and  iron  ore,  and  there  is  no  rea- 
son why  all  the  coast  of  New  England,  from  Machiasto  Massachusetts  Bay,  and 
from  Massachusetts  Bay  to  Long-  Island  Sound  and  New  York,  should  not  be 
lined  with  furnaces  and  rolling-mills.  Take  off  the  tax  on  Nova  Scotia  coal 
and  ore,  and  Maine,  which,  under  the  "  keep  on  the  tax  policy,"  is  the  one  and 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  201 

Consequently,  the  damage  inflicted  upon  the  country 
by  our  tax  on  raw  materials  must  be  understood  to  be 
properly  appreciated.  It  is  a  two-edged  sword  which 
cuts  both  in  buying  and  in  selling.  If  we  refuse  to 
take  in  pay  the  produce  of  people  who  are  in  want  of 
manufactured  goods,  we  simply  make  it  impossible  for 
that  people  to  trade  with  us.  Oar  trade  with  Australia 
is  a  case  in  point.  We  are  very  much  in  need  of 
plenty  of  cheap  wool.  But  our  government  prohibits  our 
merchants  from  trading  with  the  people  of  Australia 
upon  an  equitable  basis,  by  placing  an  exorbitant  tax 
upon  their  wool,  in  consequence  of  which,  instead  of 
buying  from  us  the  manufactured  articles  they  need, 
they  buy  from  England,  France  and  Germany,  all  of 
which  allow  their  wool  to  come  in  free. 

This  condition  of  affairs  has  been  fully  described  by 
Consul  Griffith,  at  Sidney,  Australia,  in  the  following  let- 
ter to  the  State  Department: 

"  The  people  here  complain  that  it  is  not  just  to  expect 
them  to  purchase  goods  and  wares  from  the  United  States 
when  wool,  the  chief  product  of  Australia,  is  almost 
excluded  from  the  United  States  market  on  account  of 
protective  duties.  I  believe,  however,  if  a  better  knowl- 
edge of  the  character  of  the  Avools  grown  here  existed 
in  the  United  States  the  trade  would  be  much  larger 
than  it  is. 

only  state  in  the  union  that  is  decreasing  in  population,  which  is  falling  behind- 
hand in  manufactures  and  in  the  disbursement  of  wages  to  its  people,  station- 
ary in  her  agriculture,  increasing  in  the  number  of  her  illiterates  and  crim- 
inals, paying  her  female  school-teachers  less  than  is  paid  by  the  emancipated 
slaves  of  Alabama  and  South  Carolina,  and  is  witnessing  the  steady  progress 
to  annihilation  of  her  former  great  special  industry  of  wooden  shipbuilding; 
take  off  the  taxes,  I  say,  and  Maine  might  build  iron  ship*  for  the  world,  and 
place  upon  her  deserted  harbors  industrial  establishments  that  would  man  than 
rival  those  now  existing  in  Scotland  upon  the  Clyde,  and  in  Germany  upvn  the 
Weser."  —  David  A.  Wells,  Ex.-U.  S.  Ta.r  Commissioner. 


202  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

"  The  Australasian  wools  best  suited  for  the  United 
States  market  are  chiefly  of  light,  sound,  shafty  fleece. 
These  wools  are  usually  produced  in  the  south  and  south- 
eastern Iiiverina  districts,  in  this  colony,  and  in  the  upper 
Murray  district  in  Victoria.  Australasian  wools  are,  as  a 
rule,  soft-handling,  fine-haired  and  silky.  These  proper- 
ties are  mainly  due  to  climatic  influences,  although  the 
natural  pasturage  of  the  interior  has  without  doubt 
assisted  in  developing  these  characteristics.  Some  of  the 
high  grades  of  wool  grown  in  the  United  States  compare 
very  favorably  with  Australasian  wools,  but,  as  a  rule, 
the  American  wools  are  harsher  and  are  wanting-  in  elas- 
ticity  and  fitting  properties. 

"  The  modification  of  the  present  duties  on  Austral- 
asian wools  would  undoubtedly  give  a  great  impetus  to 
the  commerce  of  both  countries.  The  United  States 
would  then  draw  more  largely  than  ever  on  the  colonies 
for  all  wools  suitable  for  fine  and  superfine  cloth  and 
ladies'  dress  goods.  There  is  no  question  about  the  Amer- 
ican manufacturers  being  able  to  produce  fine  cloths  and 
ladies'  dress  goods  of  equal  quality  and  finish  to  those  of 
the  most  celebrated  mills  of  Europe,  and  yet,  on  account 
of  the  duty  on  Australasian  wool  the  American  merchants 
are  obliged  to  import  the  great  bulk  of  these  articles  from 
England,  France  and  Belgium. 

"  In  the  event  of  the  reduction  of  the  duties  on  Aus- 
tralasian wools,  or  of  the  admission  of  that  class  of  wools 
peculiar-  to  this  country,  and  not  grown  in  the  United 
States,  the  American  mill-owner  would  soon  be  in  a 
position  not  only  to  undersell  in  his  own  market  all 
woolen  fabrics  of  a  foreign  make,  but  to  compete  success- 
fully with  other  woolen-manufacturing  countries  in  the 
various  markets  of  the  world.     At  the  same  time  the 


EFFECT    OF   PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  20., 

American  flockmaster  would  not  experience  any  loss  by 
the  change  in  the  tariff,  as  the  wools  imported  would  be 
of  a  different  quality  from  those  which  he  is  able  to 
produce.  The  advantages  resulting  from  such  a  change 
would  also  be  very  great  to  Australasia,  for  there  would 
then  be  a  keener  competition  than  at  present  for  those 
classes  of  wool  especially  adapted  to  the  American 
markets." 

Consequently,  as  before  stated,  our  manufacturing 
capacities  far  exceed  the  requirements  of  the  home 
market,  and  as  long  as  production  is  confined  to  the  com- 
paratively narrow  limits  of  the  United  States,  overpro- 
duction, auction  and  sheriff  sales,  the  closing  of  factories 
and  the  enforced  idleness  of  labor,  with  all  its  heart-rend- 
ing miseries,  are  the  disastrous  results.  An  export  tax 
upon  cotton  and  cereals  would  not  be  more  unjust  or 
more  impolitic  than  the  import  tax  upon  the  raw  material 
of  our  manufacturers.  Imagine  for  an  instant  the  dire 
consequences  following  such  a  suicidal  policy.  Suppose 
our  government  should  levy  an  export  tax  of  say  twenty- 
five  per  cent  upon  these  agricultural  products,  which 
would  close  the  foreign  markets  to  the  surplus  product  of 
our  farmers  and  planters,  how  many  }Tears  would  it  re- 
quire to  shut  up  every  factory  in  the  country  and  bring 
ruin  and  desolation  to  every  household  in  the  land? 

Free  raw-material  would  put  three-fourths  of  our 
manufacturers  upon  a  level  with  their  foreign  com- 
petitors in  the  markets  of  the  world,  increase  the  demand 
for  their  products  and  insure  permanent  and  lucrative 
employment  to  their  operatives. 

But,  if  our  manufacturers  were  thus  relieved,  as  a 
matter  of  justice  to  the  consumer,  an  indemnifying  re- 
duction of  taxes  on  the  finished  articles  ought  to  follow. 


204  THE   PKOTECTIVE   TAEIFF. 


MONOPOLY. 

The  amazing  claim  set  up  by  protectionists,  that  their 
system  has  the  effect  of  lowering  the  price  of  the  man- 
ufactured article,  reminds  one  of  the  Irishman's  reply  to 
his  employer  when  told,  if  he  did  not  want  his  wages  re- 
duced to  fifty  cents  a  day,  he  had  better  vote  for  the  pro- 
tectionist candidate  for  Congress. 

"  Boss,"  said  he,  "if  yez  indade  belaved  that,  yez'd  re- 
quoir  iv'ry  mither's  son  of  us  to  vote  t'other  way." 

So,  if  the  protectionists  really  believed  protection  had 
the  effect  of  lowering  prices,  they  would  fight  the  system 
to  a  man. 

This,  however,  is  but  one  of  their  many  pretenses  orig- 
inated to  bolster  up  an  iniquitous  system ;  in  other  words 
to  sugar-coat  the  pill. 

Its  advocates  are  perfectly  well  aware  of  the  fact  that 
the  causes  for  this  phenomena  of  price  reduction  are  to 
be  found  in  the  immutable  laws  of  human  progress,  in 
the  ingenuity  and  perseverance  of  man,  who  is  con- 
stantly at  work  to  invent  some  new  contrivance  to  im- 
prove and  apply  new  machinery,  and  to  adopt  more 
modern  methods  of  manufacture,  Avhereby  time  may  be 
saved,  the  expenses  of  production  lessened,  and  the 
efficiency  of  labor  increased. 

This  progressive  movement  by  which  prices  are  lowered 
is  going  on  in  Old  Europe,  where  competition  is  excess- 
ive, at  a  more  rapid  rate  than  here,  and  it  is  owing  to 
this  fact  alone  that  our  tariff,  however  exorbitant,  is  insuf- 
ficient to  keep  out  foreign  goods. 

The  restrictive  policy  of  the  government,  which  con- 
fines our  manufacturers  to  the  home  supply,  is  daily 
bringing  us  nearer  to  the  conditions  prevailing  in  the  Old 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  205 

World.  The  products  of  our  mines  and  factories  being 
largely  in  excess  of  our  requirements,  the  small  and  finan- 
cially weaker  concerns  have  had  either  to  succumb  to 
the  pressure  or  be  absorbed  by  the  more  wealthy  and 
powerful  corporations. 

But  these  disastrous  results,  notwithstanding  this  cut- 
throat competition  in  the  wild  race  for  the  mastery  in  the 
home  supply,  continue  unabated,  and  possibly  with 
more  tenacit}^  What  formerly  has  been  but  a  cat-and- 
dog  fight  has  now  become  one  between  giants. 

This  relentless  war  of  competition,  having  lasted  for 
years,  is  the  only  cause  of  the  ruinous  reduction  in  prices, 
and  there  is  no  doubt  but  that  the  statement  of  the  well- 
known  statistician,  Mr.  Atkinson,  is  correct,  that  at  the 
present  time  the  profits  of  the  manufacturers  on  the 
average  do  not  exceed  five  per  cent  of  the  capital 
invested. 

Protection  has  seen  its  best  days,  and  instead  of 
longer  being  a  benefit  to  the  manufacturers  it  is  a  loss  to 
a  majority  of  them.  Prof.  Tausig,  of  Harvard  Uni- 
versity, truthfully  says:  "The  manufacturer  does  not,  on 
account  of  this  import  tax,  obtain  exceptional  profits  in 
the  production  of  these  protected  articles.  It  is  true  that 
in  some  cases  of  monopoly  he  may  permanently  make 
high  profits.  But  in  many  cases  he  fails  to  do  so.  It 
may  cost  more,  from  inherent  and  natural  causes,  to  make 
the  protected  article  at  home  than  it  costs  to  make  it 
abroad.  In  this  case  —  the  most  frequent  —  the  home 
producer  gets  higher  prices  in  consequence  of  the  duty,  but 
he  does  not  make  correspondingly  high  profits.  The  tax 
on  the  consumer  here  represents  simply  the  greater  cost, 
the  inherent  natural  disadvantage  of  making  the  com- 
modity at  home.      It  represents  a  useless  diversion  of  na- 


206  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

tional  industry.  Thus  a  commodity  is  made  at  home  which 
can  be  more  cheaply  bought  abroad,  and  nobody  is  ben- 
efited by  the  tax  imposed  upon  the  consumer." 

The  system  is  now  become  simply  one  of  waste  and 
of  reciprocal  plunder.  The  manufacturers  are  eating 
each  other  up,  or,  rather,  steal  from  each  other  in  the 
fashion  of  the  monkeys  in  Exeter  Exchange,  London,  as 
described  by  an  English  writer : 

"  These  monkeys  used  to  be  confined  in  a  row  of  nar- 
row cages,  each  of  which  had  a  pan  for  his  food.  When 
all  the  monkeys  were  supplied  with  their  suppers,  it  was 
observed  that  scarcely  anyone  of  them  ate  from  his  own 
pan.  Each  thrust  his  arm  through  the  bars  and  robbed 
his  right  and  left-hand  neighbor.  Half  of  what  was  so 
seized  was  spilt  and  lost  in  the  conveyance  to  his  own 
mouth,  and  while  one  monkey  was  thus  unprofitably  en- 
gaged in  plundering  some  other  monkey,  his  own  pan 
was  exposed  to  a  similar  depreciation  by  his  friend  in 
the  rear." 

This  illustration  of  mingled  knavery  and  absurdity 
is  shockingly  human,  and  fairly  shows  that  half  of  what 
the  manufacturers  seize  from  each  other  is  lost  in  the 
"  shuffle." 

They  understand  that  the  only  remedy  for  this  condi- 
tion of  affairs  consists  in  a  mutual  understanding  that 
their  interests  are  identical,  and  this  furnishes  the  solu- 
tion to  the  great  mysterious  movement  now  in  progress, 
to  organize  every  important  branch  of  industry  in  the 
United  States  into  a  "pool"  or  a  "trust,"*  with  a  view 

*  Every  one  knows  about  the  thirty-million-dollar  steel  combination,  which 
has  not  kept  the  price  of  rails  from  declining  from  $166  a  ton  in  1867  to  $32  a  ton 
in  1884,  but  during  this  decline  has  kept  the  price  of  rails  — that  is  the  price  of 
transportation,  that  is  the  price  of  everything-  —  higher  in  this  country  than  any- 
where else.    Chairman  Morrison  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  is  a  wit- 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION   ON    MANUFACTURERS.  207 

of  curtailing  production  and  maintaining  prices,  and 
thus,  if  possible,  to  avert  the  impending  industrial 
crash. 

To  those  who  have  but  superficially  considered  the 
effect  of  the  protective  system,  it  may  seem  a  rash 
statement  to  make,  that  the  government  of  the  United 
Slates  is  primarily  responsible  for  this  prevailing  mo- 
nopoly mania  with  which  the  country  is  now  afflicted. 

It  is  not  capital  that  creates  monopolies,  it  is  the 
absence  of  competition,  and,  as  long  as  competition  is 
nut  debarred,  there  need  be  no  apprehension  from  con- 
centrated capital.     But  competition  being  destroyed  by 

ness  to  the  fact  that  the  chimneys  of  the  Vulcan  Mill  at  St.  Louis  stood  smokeless 
for  years,  and  meanwhile  its  owners  received  a  subsidy  reported  at  $400,000 
a  year  from  the  other  mills  of  the  combination  for  not  making  rails,  with, 
however,  no  payment  to  its  men  for  not  working.  The  "  Age  of  Steel "  startled 
the  country  last  January  by  the  statement  that  a  monster  pool  was  to  be  formed 
of  all  our  pig-iron  manufacturers.  The  country  was  to  be  divided  into  six  dis- 
tricts. As  many  furnaces  were  to  be  put  out  of  blast  as  were  necessary  to  prevent 
us  from  having  too  much  iron,  and  these  idle  furnaces  were  to  share,  like  the 
Vulcan  Steel  Mill,  the  profits  of  those  that  ran.  This  has  not  yet  proved  to  be 
history,  but  it  may  turn  out  to  have  been  prophecy. 

There  are  too  many  nails  for  the  nail-makers,  though  no  such  complaint  has 
been  heard  from  the  house-builders.  There  is  a  nail  association,  which  at  the 
beginning  of  the  year  advanced  prices  ten  cents  a  keg.  Last  November  it 
ordered  a  suspension  of  the  nail  machines  for  five  weeks,  to  the  great  distress  of 
eight  thousand  workmen,  who  are  also  machines  — self-feeders.  "  We  linpc," 
said  the  nail-men,  according  to  a  Pittsburgh  dispatch  of  December  £9, 1882,  "to 
show  consumers  that  we  can  not  only  control  production,  but  that  we  can  do  so 
unanimously,  and  at  the  very  time  when  nails  are  the  least  wanted."  On  April 
9,  of  this  5'ear,  the  nail  manufacturers  of  the  West  met  again  at  Pittsburgh, 
and  adopted  the  most  modern  form  of  pool,  with  managers  having  full  powers 
to  regulate  prices  and  restrict  production.  "An  early  advance  of  prices  may 
be  expected,"  Ave  are  told.  Every  mill  in  the  West  is  in  the  pool.  Nail-buyers 
are  not  allowed  to  converse  with  nail-makers.  All  business  must  be  done  through 
the  board  of  control. 

There  is  too  much  barbed  wire  for  the  wire  manufacturers,  though  not  for  the 
farmers,  and  a  pool,  under  the  "entire  control "  of  eleven  directors,  has,  within 
a  few  -weeks,  been  formed,  in  which  are  enrolled  all  the  chief  manufacturers. 
Its  members  met  in  March,  in  St.  Louis,  and  advanced  prices.  They  met  again 
in  Chicago,  April  4,  and  advanced  prices  ten  per  cent,  and  adjourned  to  meet 
in  thirty  days  for  the  purpose  of  making  another  advance.  This  combination 
cuts  off  competition  at  both  ends.    It  confederates  the  makers,  so  that  they 


208  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

the  action  of  the  government  in  taxing  the  foreign  article, 
thereby  preventing  its  importation,  and,  consequently, 
conferring  upon  the  home  manufacturer  of  a  like  com- 
modity a  monopoly  of  the  home  market,  there  is  no 
escape  from  this  dilemma.  It  may  not  have  been  the 
intention  of  our  legislators  to  create  these  pools  and  trusts, 
but  it  is  the  logical  effect  of  this  one-sided  legislation, 
and  all  attempts  to  charge  capital  with  the  responsibility 
are  absolutely  frivolous. 

A  great  deal  of  misleading  clap-trap  is  heard  about 
the  accumulation  and  concentration  of  capital.  The 
industrial  progress  of  the  age,  the  application  of  steam 

shall  not  sell  in  competition  with  each  other,  and  it  buys  all  its  raw  material 
through  one  purchasing  agent,  so  that  its  members  do  not  buy  in  competition. 

Thirteen  concerns  making  wrought-iron  pipes  in  this  country  met  in  Decem- 
ber last  to  unite  under  the  very  appropriate  name  of  the  Empire  Iron  Company. 
Each  was  to  deposit  $20,000  as  security  that  he  would  adhere  to  rules  to  prevent 
the  calamity  cf  too  much  iron  pipe.  One  feature  of  the  pool  was  that  it  pro- 
posed to  keep  men  on  guard  at  each  mill,  to  keep  account  of  the  pipe  made  and 
shipped  ;  and  these  superintendents  were  to  be  moved  around  from  one  mill  to 
another  at  least  every  eight  weeks. 

April  1, 1883,  when  the  rest  of  us  were  lost  in  the  reckless  gayety  of  All  Fools' 
Da j',  forty-one  tack  manufacturers  found  out  there  were  too  many  tacks,  and 
formed  the  "Central  Manufacturing  Company  of  Boston,"  with  $3,000,000 
capital.  The  tack  mills  in  the  combination  run  about  three  days  in  the  week. 
"When  this  combination,  a  few  weeks  ago,  silenced  a  Pittsburgh  rival  by  buying 
him  out,  they  did  not  remove  the  machinery.  The  dead  chimneys  and  idle 
machines  will  discourage  new  men  from  starting  another  factor}',  or  can  be  run 
to  ruin  them  if  they  are  not  to  be  discouraged  in  any  other  way.  The  first  fruits 
of  the  tax-pool  were  an  increase  of  prices,  to  twice  what  they  had  been. 

And  again : 

"  When  President Gowin,  of  the  Reading  Railroad,  was  defending  that  com- 
pany in  1S75  before  a  committee  of  the  Pennsylvania  legislature,  lor  having 
taken  part  in  the  combination  of  the  coal  companies  to  cure  the  evil  of  "too 
much  coal"  by  putting  up  the  price  and  cutting  down  the  amount  for  sale,  he 
pleaded  that  there  were  fifty  trades  in  which  the  same  thing  was  done.  He  had 
a  list  of  them  to  show  to  the  committee.    He  said: 

"  Every  pound  of  rope  we  buy  for  our  vessels  or  for  our  mines  is  bought 
at  a  price  fixed  by  a  committee  of  the  rope  manufacturers  of  the  United  States. 
Every  keg  of  nails,  every  paper  of  tacks,  all  our  screws  and  wrenches  and 
hinges,  the  boiler  flues  for  our  locomotives,  arc  never  bought  except  at  the 
price  fixed  by  the  representatives  cf  the  mills  that  manufacture  them.  Iron 
beams  for  your  houses  or  your  bridges  can  be  had  only  at  the  prices  agreed  up- 


EFFECT    OF   PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  209 

and  electricity,  the  division  of  labor  in  factories,  have, 
collectively,  rendered  the  concentration  of  capital  a 
necessity,  and,  as  long  as  capital  is  thus  legitimately 
employed,  its  concentration  is  beneficial,  rather  than 
injurious  to  the  general  welfare  of  the  country. 

The  injury  inflicted  upon  the  community  is  not  in  the 
use  but  in  the  abuse  of  great  wealth,  which  is  the  same 
as  any  other  abuse,  a  subject  for  judiciary  or  legislative 
interference. 

The  building  of  our  railroads  required  the  concen- 
tration of  capital,  but  that  the  country  in  general  has 
been  immensely  benefited  by  the  change  from  the  stage- 
coach and  cart  to  the  passenger  and  freight  car,  will 
hardly  be  questioned.  If,  however,  the  managers  of 
these  railroads  abuse  their  trust  by  stock-watering,  to  the 
detriment  of  the  original  shareholders ;  violate  their 
duties  as  common  carriers  (for  which  they  obtained  their 
franchises),  by  organizing  pools  with  competing  lines  to 
extort  unreasonable  charges;  discriminate  between  ship- 
on  by  a  combination  of  those  who  produce  them.  Fire-brick,  gas-pipe,  terra- 
cotta pipe  for  drainage,  every  keg  of  powder  we  buy  to  blast  coal,  are  pur- 
chased under  the  same  arrangement.  Every  pane  of  window  glass  in  this  house 
was  bought  at  a  scale  of  prices  established  exactly  in  the  same  manner.  White 
lead,  galvanized  sheet  iron,  hose  and  belting  and  files  are  bought  and  sold  at  a 
rate  determined  in  the  same  way.— Henry  D.  Lloyd,  North  American  Review 
June,  1886. 

In  some  instances  values  are  being  artificially  staved  by  the  "  trusts  "  that 
are  springing  up  everywhere,  but  where  the  law  of  competition  are  allowed  to 
work  out  their  legitimate  results,  prices  are  weakening.  Railroad-building  has 
been  greatly  overdone,  and  so  have  many  branches  of  manufacturing,  and  steel 
rails  are  again  lower,  as  the  result  of  overproduction.  Meanwhile,  the  work  of 
consolidation  into  trusts  and  Jay  Gould  schemes  goes  forward,  and  the  tele- 
graph lines  are  all  being  merged  into  the  Western  Union.  The  coal  men  have 
squeezed  25  cents  more  on  every  ton  cf  anthracite,  and  even  the  Chicago  milk- 
men have  formed  a  "trust."  Sugar  refiners  have  consolidated  into  a  "  trust" 
and  the  first-fruits  are  seen  in  an  advance  in  that  saccharine  article.  The  farm- 
ers are  about  the  only  people  who  are  neglecting  to  form  "trusts,"  and  they  are 
consequently  selling  their  wheat  and  corn  at  very  moderate  profits.— Market 
report,  Chicago  Titnes,  Oct.  18, 1887, 


210  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

pers,  and  form  combinations  with  powerful  monopolies 
for  lower  rates,  or  the  exclusive  transportation  of  their 
products  to  uphold  and  rob  the  great  public ;  in  this  case 
the  capital  invested  has  been  diverted  from  its  original 
design.  And  here  again  the  government  is  responsible 
for  the  injury,  if  it  fails,  by  adequate  legislation,  to  pro- 
tect the  private  rights  of  the  citizen. 

What  has  been  said  of  the  benefits  accruing  to  the 
general  public  by  the  concentration  of  capital  for  railroad 
purposes,  holds  good  when  applied  to  our  manufacturing 
and  mining  industries.  As  a  rule,  capital  is  exceedingly 
cautious  and  unless  a  new  enterprise  promises  profitable 
returns,  it  does  not  concentrate  to  an  alarming  extent, 
and  as  long  as  individual  enterprise  is  permitted  to  have 
fair  play  and  competition  to  have  full  sway,  the  concen- 
tration of  capital  in  any  branch  of  industry  can  work  no 
possible  injury  to  the  public.  But  when,  as  has  been 
said  before,  government  steps  in  and  presumes  to  manage, 
regulate  and  protect  certain  branches  of  industry,  it  does 
so  with  the  tacit  understanding  that  the  capital  invested 
in  such  industry  shall  have  the  monopoly  of  the  home 
market  to  the  extent  of  the  obstruction  which  bars  out 
foreign  competition,  and  in  some  of  the  most  important 
branches  it  is  left  to  the  caprice  of  those  engaged  in 
those  industries  to  make  this  monopoly  absolute. 

It  is,  for  instance,  manifest  that  the  placing  of  a  pro 
vective  tariff  upon  coal,  or  upon  mineral  of  any  descrip- 
tion, is-  paramount  to  the  creation  of  a  monopoly,  since 
the  extent  of  these  gifts  of  nature  is  limited  and  may 
be  absorbed  or  controlled  by  a  few. 

The  magnitude  and  exclusiveness  of  this  class  of 
monopolies  is,  in  the  absence  of  foreign  competition,  only 
a  matter  of  capital  available  and  of  greater  or  less  unscru- 


EFFECT    OF   PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  211 

pulousness  on  the  part  of  the  operators  to  concentrate 
these  natural  gifts  in  the  hands  of  a  limited  number  of 
individuals  or  corporators. 

The  coal  monopoly  of  Pennsylvania  and  Ohio  is  a  case 
in  point.  Almost  every  acre  of  the  extensive  coal  lands 
of  these  states  has  passed  from  private  parties  into  the 
hands  of  a  powerful  and  unscrupulous  syndicate.*  The 
richness  of  these  mines  exceed  those  in  England  a  thousand 
times,  and,  while  in  the  latter  country  the  "  black  diamond  " 
is  only  found  at  great  depths,  here  it  is  found  almost  on 
the  surface  of  the  earth.  The  cost  of  mining  coal  is  about 
sixty  cents  per  ton,  or  less  than  the  amount  of  the  tax 

*Last  July  Messrs.  Vantlorbilt,  Sloan,  and  one  or  two  others  out  of  several 
hundred  owners  of  coal  lands  and  coal  railroads,  met  in  the  pleasant  shadows 
of  Saratoga  to  make  "  a  binding-  arrangement  for  the  control  of  the  coal  trade." 
"Binding-  arrangement,"  the  sensitive  coal  presidents  say,  they  prefer  to  the  word 
"combination."  The  gratuitous  warmth  of  summer  suggested  to  these  men 
the  need  the  public  would  have  of  artificial  heat,  at  artificial  prices,  the  coming 
winter.  It  was  agreed  to  fix  prices,  and  to  prevent  the  production  of  too  much 
of  the  raw  material  of  warmth,  by  suspensions  of  mining.  In  anticipation  of 
the  arrival  of  the  cold  wave  from  Manitoba,  a  cold  wave  was  sent  out  all  over 
the  United  States,  from  their  parlors  in  New  York,  in  an  order  for  half-time 
work  by  the  miners  during  the  first  three  months  of  this  year,  and  for  an 
increase  of  prices.  These  are  the  means  this  combination  uses  to  keep  down 
wages — the  price  of  men,  and  keep  up  the  price  of  coal  —  the  wages  of  capital. 
Prices  of  coal  in  the  West  are  fixed  by  the  Western  Anthracite  Coal  Association, 
controlled  entirely  by  the.  large  railroads  and  mine-owners  of  Pennsylvania. 
This  association  regulates  the  price  Avest  of  Buffalo  and  Pittsburgh  and  in 
Canada.  Our  annual  consumption  of  anthracite  is  now  between  31,000,000  and 
32,000,000  tons.  The  West  takes  between  5,000,000  and  6,000,000  tons.  The  com- 
panies which  compose  the  combination  mine,  transport,  and  sell  their  own 
coal.  They  are  obliterating  other  mine-owners  and  the  retailer.  The  Chicago 
and  New  York  dealer  has  almost  nothing1  to  say  about  what  he  shall  payor 
what  he  shall  charge,  or  what  his  profits  shall  be.  The  great  companies  do  not 
let  the  little  man  make  too  much.  Year  by  year  the  coal  retailers  are  sinking 
into  the  status  of  mere  agents  of  the  combination,  with  as  little  freedom  as  the 
consumer. 

The  total  amount  of  anthracite  coal  land  is  estimated  by  President  Gowen, 
of  the  Reading,  to  be  between  260,000  and  270,000  acres.  Of  this  the  Reading 
Coal  and  Iron  Company  owns  95,000  acres,  and  also  holds  under  a  lease  of  the 
Central  Railroad  of  New  Jersey  about  14,000  acres,  making  in  the  neighborhood 
of  110,000  acres.  The  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad  controls  about  25,000  acres ;  the 
Delaware,  Lackawanna  and  Western  about  ~0,000 ;  the  Delaware  and  Hudson 


212  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

upon  foreign  coal,  and  it  can  be  delivered  at  a  fair  profit 
in  New  York  at  $3.50  per  ton  and  at  $4  in  Chicago.  But 
this  greedy  syndicate  is  not  satisfied  with  a  fair  profit ; 
it  ^counts  its  profits  only.  This  is  the  way  they  do  it. 
Three  or  four  gentlemen,  quietly  sipping  a  glass  of 
champaign  and  smoking  their  Havanas,  may  be  found 
yearly  either  at  Saratoga,  N.  Y.,  or  in  one  of  Delmonico's 
private  cabinets,  discussing  the  situation  of  the  coal 
market.  They  are  not  there  for  the  purpose  of  ascer- 
taining how  an  abundance  of  fuel  at  a  reasonable  price 
can  be  secured  for  the  country ;  it  is  not  for  this  they  have 
met.    The  very  thought  of  plenty  and  cheapness  is  repng- 

about  20,000 ;  the  Pennsylvania  Coal  Company  8,000  to  10,000,  and  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad  5,000  to  10,000.  The  rest  of  the  coal  lands  is  held  by  individuals, 
firms  and  corporations,  and  is  "  necessarily  tributary  "  to  the  railroad  lines  of 
the  companies  above  named,  with  all  that  that  implies.  The  capitalization  of 
the  coal  companies  with  that  of  their  satellites  is  upward  of  $500,000,000.  This 
capitalization  was  declared  by  the  New  York  legislative  committee  to  be  excess- 
ive. Mr.  James  B.  Hodgskin  explained,  some  years  ago,  in  The  Nation,  how 
this  inflation  was  brought  about.  A  generation  since,  the  most  important  coal 
lands  were  covered  by  the  prettiest  farms  and  the  wildest  mountain  forests  in 
the  United  States,  then  worth  fifty  cents  to  fifty  dollars  an  acre.  They  were 
bought  up  by  speculators  who  sold  them  to  the  companies  at  ten  to  twenty 
times  the  real  cost.  When  railroads  were  found  to  be  necessary  for  the  develop- 
ment of  the  mines,  railroad  schemes  were  taken  in  hand  by  the  same  class  of 
men,  who  had  acquired  experience,  skill  and  money  by  their  manipulation  of 
the  mining  companies,  and  similar  tactics  were  employed  to  make  money  cut 
of  the  new  roads.  Roads  were  built  costing  but  one-half  or  three-quarters  of 
the  first  mortgage  bonds  issued  on  them,  and  were  then  saddled  with  additional 
stock  capital  equal  to  the  bonds,  making  the  nominal  capital  of  the  roads  three 
or  four  times  the  real  cost.  Of  com-se,  the  road  was  expected  to  earn  dividends 
on  the  $25  of  real  cost  as  well  as  the  $75  of  fictitious  cost.  The  swollen  total  at 
which  the  capitalization  of  the  coal  companies  now  stands  was  obtained  by 
adding  the  dropsical  mining  stocks  to  the  dropsical  railroad  stocks.  This  is  one 
of  the  cases  in  which  like  has  not  cured  like. 

One  of  the  sights  which  this  coal  side  of  our  civilization  has  to  show  is  the 
presence  of  herds  of  little  children  of  all  ages,  from  six  years  upward,  at  work 
in  the  coal  breakers,  toiling  in  dirt,  and  air  thick  with  carbon  dust,  from  dawn 
to  dark,  of  every  day  in  the  week  except  Sunday.  These  coal  breakers  arc  the 
only  schools  they  know.  A  letter  from  the  coal  regions  in  the  Philadelphia 
Press  declares  that  "  there  are  no  schools  in  the  world  where  more  evil  is  learned 
or  more  innocence  destroyed  than  in  the  breakers.  It  is  shocking  to  watch  the 
vile  practices  indulged  in  by  these  children,  to  hear  the  frightful  oaths  they 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  213 

nant  to  them.  It  is  through  scarcity  and  high  prices 
that  they  expect  to  reap  a  bounteous  harvest.  The  ques- 
tion with  those  gentlemen  is  only :  "  What  is  the  total 
sum  we  can  safely  extort  from  the  public  the  coming- 
year —  how  much  of  this  sort  of  robbery  will  the  patient 
people  stand  ? "  The  fact  that  a  hundred  thousand  miners, 
the  bread  for  their  families,  is  dependent  upon  their  deci- 
sion, that  hundreds  of  thousands  of  families  all  through 
the  country  will  suffer  for  the  want  of  fuel  during  a  pro- 
longed winter  does  not  enter  into  their  computations  for 
an  instant.  At  the  adjournment  of  the  trio,  the  ukase  is 
sent  forth  that  so  many  tons  of  coal,  and  no  more,  shall 
be  mined  the  coming  season,  the  price  being  left  for  con- 
sideration at  a  future  meeting. 

In  view  of  what  is  now  taking  place  in  this  country  it 

use,  to  see  their  total  disregard  for  religion  and  humanity."  In  the  upper  part 
of  Luzerne  county,  out  of  22,000  inhabitants  3,000  are  children  between  six  and 
fifteen  years  of  age,  at  work  in  this  way.  "There  is  always  a  restlessness  among 
the  miners,"  an  officer  of  one  of  the  New  York  companies  said,  "when  we  are 
working  them  on  half  time."  The  latest  news  from  the  region  of  the  coal  com- 
bination is  that  the  miners  are  so  dissatisfied  with  the  condition  in  which  they 
are  kept,  by  the  suspension  of  work  and  the  importation  of  competing  Hun- 
garian laborers  in  droves,  that  they  are  forming  a  combination  of  their  own,  a 
revival  of  the  old  Miners'  and  Laborers'  Association,  which  was  broken  up  by 
the  labor  troubles  of  1874  and  1875. 

Combination  is  busy  in  those  soft-coal  districts,  whose  production  is  so 
large  that  it  must  be  sent  to  competitive  markets.  A  pool  has  just  been  formed 
covering  the  annual  product  of  6,000,000  tons  of  the  mines  of  Ohio.  Indiana  and 
Illinois  are  to  be  brought  in,  and  it  is  planned  to  extend  it  to  all  the  bituminous 
coal  districts  that  compete  with  each  other.  The  appearance  of  Mr.  Vanderbilt, 
last  December,  in  the  Clearfield  district  of  Pennsylvania,  at  the  head  of  a  com- 
pany capitalized  for  $5,000,000,  was  the  first  entry  of  a  metropolitan  mind  into 
this  field.  Mr.  Vanderbilt's  role  is  to  be  that  of  producer,  carrier,  dealer  and 
consumer,  all  in  one.  Until  he  came,  the  district  was  occupied  by  a  number  of 
small  companies  and  small  operators,  as  used  to  be  the  case  in  the  anthracite 
field  in  the  old  days.  But  the  man  who  works  himself,  with  his  sons,  in  a  small 
mine,  cutting  perhaps  from  twenty  to  forty  tons  a  day,  cannot  expect  to  survive 
the  approach  of  the  Manhattan  capitalist.  The  small  Clearfield  producers,  look- 
ing at  the  fate  of  their  kind  in  the  anthracite  country,  greeted  Mr.  Vanderbilt's 
arrival  with  the  question :  "  What  is  to  become  of  us  ?  "  "If  the  small  operator," 
said  one  of  the  great  man's  lieutenants,  "  goes  to  the  wall,  that  is  his  misfortune, 
not  our  fault."—  Henry  D.  Lloyd,  North  American  Review,  June,  1886. 


214  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  a  great  mistake  was  coih 
mitted  by  the  "  Fathers "  in  allowing  coal,  mineral  and 
salt  lands  to  pass  into  individual  ownership,  instead  of 
reserving  it  to  the  government,  the  latter  charging  a  mere 
nominal  royalty  for  development.  But  for  the  govern- 
ment to  confer  upon  the  fortunate  owners  of  coal  lands  the 
additional  prerogative  for  exclusively  supplying  the  country 
with  coal,  by  excluding  the  foreign  article,  is  more  than  a 
mistake ;  it  is  a  crime ;  it  is  the  surrender  of  a  portion  of 
the  people's  earnings  into  the  hands  of  greedy  speculators 
by  an  arbitrary  governmental  act. 

The  amount  of  the  tax  on.  foreign  coal  does  not  as 
materially  affect  its  introduction  as  does  the  fact  that  this 
proscriptive  system  of  production  is  the  accepted  policy 
of  our  government.  The  seventy-five  cents  tax  serves  the 
American  coal  syndicate  just  as  well  as  did  the  tax  of 
$1.50.  This  state  of  the  case  was  well  understood  by  the 
coal  barons  when  they  submitted  to  the  reduction.  As 
long  as  capitalists  are  aware  of  the  fact  that,  whenever 
any  protected  industry  is  threatened  by  an  "  overflow  "  of 
the  cheaper  foreign  article,  all  they  have  to  do  is  to  set 
the  lobby  at  Washington  to  work,  they  will  hardly  ven- 
ture their  means  in  the  precarious  enterprise  of  developing 
mines  in  Nova  Scotia,  or  in  constructing  vessels  to  trans- 
port the  product  to  the  United  States. 

By  way  of  illustration ;  a  few  days  ago,  while  visiting 
a  gentleman  having  his  office  in  the  First  National  Bank 
building,  by  chance  we  came  to  speak  of  the  hardships 
entailed  upon  the  public  by  the  coal  monopoly.  I  was 
informed  by  him  that  previous  to  the  enactment  of  the 
duty  on  coal,  he  had  organized  a  company  in  Boston  for 
the  development  of  a  coal  mine  in  Nova  Scotia,  and  the 
enterprise  had  succeeded  so  well  they  were  able  to  deliver 


EFFECT   OF    PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  215 

excellent  coal  in  Boston  at  $4.25,  with  a  profit  of  $1  per 
ton.  It  was  the  intention  of  the  company  to  enlarge 
their  facilities  with  the  prospect  of  eventually  supplying 
not  only  Boston  with  coal,  but  many  of  the  manufactur- 
ing centres  of  New  England,  also.  These  fine  prospects 
came  to  naught  on  account  of  the  act  of  Congress  which 
placed  a  protective  duty  upon  foreign  coal.  The  company 
was  forced  into  bankruptcy  and  entailed  upon  my  friend 
a  loss  of  $10,000,  his  whole  fortune. 

This  pernicious  effect  of  the  tax  on  foreign  coal  is  the 
effect  of  every  tax  levied  upon  any  other  mineral,  and 
upon  many  of  the  raw  materials  used  in  the  early  stages 
of  manufactures,  such  as  iron,  copper,  zinc,  lead,  nickel  or 
salt,  and  of  wool,  lumber,  sugar,  etc.,  etc. 

To  create  these  over-reaching  monopolies  was  not  prob- 
ably the  motive  which  actuated  Congress  in  affording 
"  protection  "  to  the  producers  of  these  raw  materials ;  but 
these  monopolies,  and  trusts,  which  are  a  curse  to  the 
country,  are  here  on  that  account,  nevertheless. 

So  for  instance,  in  the  case  of  lumber  it  was  probably 
with  the  honest  intention  of  encouraging-  the  "infantile" 
lumber  industry  of  Northern  Wisconsin  and  Michigan, 
and  in  the  hope  that  their  labor  might  be  protected  against 
the  "pauper  labor"  of  Canada,  that  a  tax  of  $2  a  thous- 
and feet  was  laid  upon  Canada  lumber.  Our  lawmakers 
did  not  intend,  possibly,  to  give  to  a  limited  number  of 
individuals  who  were  fortunate  enough  to  get  possession 
of  large  tracts  of  pine  land  at  $1.25  per  acre  and  less,  the 
exclusive  privilege  or  monopoly  of  supplying  the  great 
Northwest  with  lumber ;  but,  whether  intentionally  or 
unintentionally,  Congress  did  so  in  fact.  Twenty-five  years 
of  pickings  afforded  by  protection  has  enabled  a  compara- 


216  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

tively  small  number  of  them  to  grow  enormously  rich.* 
But  they  seem  not  satisfied  with  the  earth.  "  The  gov- 
ernment protects  us"  they  say,  "against  foreign  interfer- 
ence, and  the  large  profits  we  have  heretofore  realized 
must  not  now  be  curtailed  by  any  annoying  home 
competitors.  Let  us  organize  a  pool,  and  fix  the  price  of 
lumber  to  suit  ourselves.  We  must  have  no  nonsense  about 
our  yearly  dividends.  These  small-fry  operators  must 
either  come  into  the  combine  and  agree  with  us  to  pluck 
the  stupid  geese  of  our  Western  towns  and  farms,  or  be 
crushed  out,"  and  so  the  lumber  trust  becomes  an 
institution  of  the  country 

In  a  previous  chapter  it  has  been  shown  by  Mr.  Dean 
how  rapidly  the  owners  of  pine  land  in  Wisconsin  and 
Michigan  are  creating  a  gigantic  monopoly ;  how  the  price 
of  lumber  is  raised  by  the  artificial  rise  of  the  ''stump- 
age  ; "  but  now  we  have  the  information  that  a  wealthy 
logging  company,  with  an  available  capital  of  from  sixty 
to  seventy  million  dollars,  is  forming  a  complete  ring 
around  the  pine  forests  of  northern  Wisconsin;  that  one 
by  one  the  great  lumber  firms  have  been  compelled  to 
enter  into  the  pool  to  protect  their  interests,  and  that  the 
few  who  had  the  temerity  to  buck  against  the  pool  were 
brought  to  a  realizing  sense  of  their  situation,  paying 
dearly  for  their  show  of  independence. 

Again,  Congress  has  placed  a  duty  of  twelve  cents  a 
hundred  on  imported  salt,  or  about  one  hundred  per  cent. 
The  president  of  the  Salt  Association  of  Michigan,  where 


*  Ex-Gov.  Alger  of  Michigan  is  a  great  traveler.  He  rides  about  the  country 
in  a  private  car  and  seldom  spends  more  than  seven  days  In  one  place.  He  makes 
his  car  his  business-office,  and  does  $1,000,000  worth  of  business  in  it  annually. 
Alger,  it  is  said,  has  made  about  $8,000,000  since  the  war.  His  lumber  interests 
are  enormous.—  Chicago  Tribune,  October  27, 1887. 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  217 

half  the  salt  used  in  this  country  is  manufactured,  admit- 
ted before  the  Tariff  Commission,  that  salt  is  only  pro- 
duced in  large  quantities  in  New  York,  Virginia  and 
Michigan;  that  the  enormous  salt  bed  in  the  North 
reached  from  Canada,  under  lake  Huron  into  the  States  ; 
that  they  were  consequently,  inexhaustible."  "What  we 
protest  against,"  continued  this  salt-lord,  "is  a  removal 
of  the  duty  from  salt,  because  our  Canadian  neighbors 
have  to  pa}7-  only  $1.25  for  the  labor  which  costs  us  $1.75." 
It  must  be  supposed  that  the  commission  believed  him 
and  believed  that  his  solicitude  for  his  laborers  alone  actuat- 
ed him,  for  the  duty  on  salt  was  not  removed,  and  as  labor 
in  this  business  is  now  "  protected,"  the  great  packing  indus- 
tries, the  farmers  and  dairymen  and  the  consumers  of  salt 
generally,  must  pay  just  about  twice  as  much  for  their  salt 
as  they  would  had  not  the  government  said  to  the  manu- 
facturers of  salt,  "go  right  along  and  charge  any  price 
you  see  fit  for  your  salt."  I  stand  guard  between  you 
and  the  fellows  in  Canada  who  have  the  impudence  to 
offer  salt  at  a  ruinous  price  to  the  American  people,  for 
as  long  as  this  people  are  silly  enough  to  believe  that  the 
Canadian  will  work  in  the  salt  mines  of  Canada  for  $1.25 
while  he  might  just  cross  the  line  into  Michigan  and  get 
$1.75,  so  long  they  will  make  no  fuss  about  your  extor- 
tionate price  on  salt.  But  this  government  aid  notwith- 
standing, the  article  is  in  danger  of  falling  in  price,  on 
account  of  overproduction  in  the  salt  mines  of  Michigan. 
So  the  output  must  be  restricted.  Thus  the  demand 
for  a  trust  that  will  regulate  and  control  the  salt  produc- 
tion of  the  country  and  fix  the  price.  Consequently,  a 
short  time  ago,  a  meeting  was  held  for  this  purpose  in 
Pittsburgh,  the  "  Protection  Hub  "  of  the  land,  at  which 
sixty-three  salt  firms  were  represented,  and  all  the  pre- 


218  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

liminaries  for  entering  into  a  gigantic  "salt  trust"  were 
perfected. 

Another  case : 

Perhaps  we  ought  to  be  charitable,  and  say  that  it  was 
not  the  intention  of  Congress  to  create  a  monopoly  by 
raising  the  duty  on  steel  blooms  which  are  used  in  the 
manufacture  of  locomotive  tires  of  driving  and  car- wheels 
from  forty-five  to  ninety  per  cent.  It  has  done  so,  never- 
theless. It  did  not  say  to  the  three  principal  mills  of  the 
country,  the  agent  of  which  lobby ed  at  Washington  for  the 
increase,  we  will  lay  this  duty  to  give  you  the  exclusive 
privilege  of  supplying  all  the  railroad  companies  of  the 
United  States  with  the  products  of  your  mills ;  but  that 
was  the  effect,  for,  as  soon  as  the  duty  had  been  raised, 
the  combination,  being  the  strongest,  drove  every  other 
competitor  out  of  the  business  (a  Chicago  firm  sharing 
that  fate),  raised  the  price  of  their  steel  tires  to  an  extor- 
tionate rate,  and  as  completely  monopolize  the  American 
market  to-day  as  if  an  expressly  stipulated  grant  had  been 
voted  them  by  the  United  States  Congress.  Blunders  of 
similar  cases  might  be  cited  but  for  the  purpose  of  illus- 
tration these  are  sufficient. 

This  is  the  way  our  manufacturers  and  mine-owners 
propose  to  obviate  the  difficulties  and  embarrassments 
resulting  from  home  competition.  Every  industry  worth 
mentioning  has  been  or  is  being  formed  into  a  monopoly 
under  the  seemingly  innocent  title  of  "  National  Associa- 
tion of  So-and-So;"  and  every  recalcitrant  manufacturer 
who  refuses  to  enter  the  compact  for  robbing  the  public, 
and  to  pay  his  pool  money,  is  boycotted,  until  he  is  either 
ruined  or  brought  into  submission. 

This  more  recent  and  most  absolute  system  of  mono- 
poly is  known  under  the  designation  of  "  trust," 


EFFECT  OF   PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  219 

A  trust  is  organized  by  the  election  of  a  number  of 
trustees  to  whom  the  property,  the  machinery,  stock — in 
fact,  the  whole  business — of  every  individual  manufacturer 
in  a  certain  line  of  products,  is  transferred  at  an  appraised 
value.  In  pay  for  his  business,  the  individual  manufact- 
urer receives  a  given  number  of  shares  and  a  certain 
amount  in  cash.  If  it  is  desirable  to  lessen  production, 
one  or  more  of  such  establishments  are  closed  up,  but  if 
kept  running,  the  former  proprietor  may  remain  the  man- 
ager at  a  salary  fixed  and  paid  by  the  trust. 

The  trust  is  strictly  an  American  institution.  The 
monarchies  of  the  old  world,  even,  have  the  welfare  of 
their  subjects  too  much  at  heart  to  allow  such  a  fungus  to 
fix  itself  upon  the  tree  of  state.  It  is  only  in  a  govern- 
ment where  legislation  may  be  controlled  by  great  corpo- 
rations that  trusts  are  possible. 

"  Trust  "  combinations  rest,  first,  on  a.  monopoly  fos- 
tered by  the  protective  tariff  which  excludes  foreign  com- 
petition, and  second,  on  an  unlawful  conspiracy  to  corner 
the  home  market.  Of  these  trusts  to  exclude  foreign 
competition,  one  of  the  most  powerful  is: 

THE   STEEL   KAIL   MONOPOLY. 

"The  Bessemer  patent  of  making  steel  rails  —  an  Eng- 
lish invention  —  was  purchased  by  a  American  syndicate 
consisting  of  about  a  dozen  iron-mill  companies,  which 
formed  a  close  pooling  corporation,  or  what  in  practice 
amounts  to  a  trust  monopoly,  and  since  that  time  — 1877 
—  have  fixed  their  own  prices  for  railroad  and  all  steel 
made  in  this  country  by  the  Bessemer  patent  process. 
They  had  to  reduce  the  old  process  price  of  $80  to  $100 
per  ton  in  order  to  get  orders  to  make  a  market.  They 
were  protected  by  a  $28  per  ton  tariff  up  to  the  revision 


220  xaK   rKOTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

of  18S3,  when  it  was  reduced  to  $17  per  ton.  "A  struggle 
is  now  in  progress,"  says  the  N.  Y.  Daily  News,  "between 
the  steel-rail  manufacturers  and  the  railway  managers. 
It  is  further  said  that  the  latter  have  decided  not  to  pur- 
chase any  more  rails  until  the  price  is  reduced  to  $30  per 
ton.  On  their  part  the  steel-rail  syndicate  still  demand 
from  $33  to  $35  per  ton,  and  on  one  pretext  after  another 
have  closed  down  their  mills  one  by  one,  some  to  make 
repairs  and  others  for  different  reasons,  until  to-day 
nearly  all  the  steel-rail  mills  of  the  country  are  idle. 

In  18S7  the  Bessemer  mills  of  the  American  syndicate 
produced  2,049,638  gross  tons,  and  for  1886  1,562,410 
gross  tons  —  an  increase  of  487,228  tons  for  1887. 

It  is  well  here  to  inquire  what  the  country  pays  to 
this  steel-rail  octopus  over  and  above  the  amount  paid  for 
rails  in  Great  Britain,  and  which  rails  are  now  being  fur- 
nished to  India  —  our  present  wheat  and  coming  cotton 
competitor  —  for  its  railways  in  process  of  construction. 
The  Indian  railways  purchased  rails  all  last  year  at  from 
$16  to  $20  per  ton.  Our  octopus  has  been  selling  to 
American  railways  during  the  same  period  at  from  $35  to 
$40  per  ton.  This  would  make  a  difference  in  the  cost  of 
the  railways  constructed  in  the  United  States  during  the 
last  year,  in  round  numbers,  of  over  $30,000,000,  as  com- 
pared with  their  cost  if  constructed  of  foreign  steel. 
When  the  steel  syndicate  charges  the  railroads  more  than 
$40  per  ton  the  latter  can  import  English  steel,  which 
costs  on  shipboard  at  Liverpool  about  $20  per  ton 
ordinarily;  and  delivered  at  Xew  York,  Boston,  Balti- 
more, Charleston,  New  Orleans,  or  Galveston,  the  cost 
without  the  duties  would  be  $23  to  $25  per  ton,  accord- 
ing to  the  expense  of  freight.  With  free  competition 
railroad  steel  would  rarely  rise  above  $28  to  $30  per  ton 
n  this  country. 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION   ON   MAN  CTFACTURERS.  221 

The  railroads  are  therefore  asking,  if  railroad  steel 
can  be  made  and  sold  by  the  Bessemer  syndicate  at  a  pro- 
lit  for  $28  to  $30  a  ton,  what  is  the  $17  per  ton  tariff 
for? 

But  the  industry,  next  to  railroad  building,  which  con- 
sumes the  most  iron,  is  that  of  iron  ship-building.  It  is 
claimed  that  it  is  the  lower  wages  paid  by  English  ship- 
builders that  enables  England  to  monopolize  the  carrying 
trade  of  the  world. 

Out  of  the  great  mass  of  evidence  collected  upon  this 
industry  which  is  most  significant,  is  that  given  by  Thomas 
J.  Curran,  an  ardent  protectionist,  a  boiler-maker  and  ship- 
builder himself.  He  was  authorized  to  speak  before  the 
Senate  Committee  in  behalf  of  the  Ship-Builders'  Associa- 
tion. "  By  letting  in  free  ships,"  he  saj^s,  "  that  is,  giving 
foreign  ships  American  registry  and  permitting  them  to 
sail  under  the  American  flag,  you  will  take  the  bread  from 
the  families  of  many  American  world ngmen ;  you  will 
deprive  American  workingmen  of  a  great  deal  of  work  — 
take  it  away  from  them  and  give  it  to  England." 

"How  do  the  wages  of  the  workingmen  in  the  ship-yards  on  the 
Delaware  compare  with  the  wages  of  the  same  class  of  workingmen  on 
the  Clyde?" — "The  workingmen  on  the  Clyde  receive  better  wages; 
'lhey  receive  at  least  $4  a  week  more  than  they  do  on  the  Delaware." 

"  Is  not  the  Delaware  the  great  place  for  iron  ship-building  in  this 
country?  " — "  It  is  the  principal  iron  ship-building  point  in  this  country." 

"  What  do  you  know  about  the  comparative  purchasing  power  of  the 
wages  received  by  the  workmen  on  the  Clyde  and  the  wages  received 
by  the  workmen  on  the  Dalaware? " — "  I  know  about  it  from  reports." 

"Which  on  the  whole  is  better  paid,  the  Clyde  workmen  or  the 
American  workmen  on  the  Delaware?  Whose  wages  will  purchase 
most  of  the  comforts  of  life? " — "  Well,  certainly,  where  a  man  receives 
$4  a  week  more,  and  where  he  can  buy  more  for  a  dollar  than  he  can 
buy  here,  his  wages  must  be  more  and  he  must  have  more  comforts." 

"You  understand,  then,  that  the  necessaries  cf  life  are  cheaper  iu 
the  old  country  than  they  are  here?  " — "Yes,  sir.  -" 


222  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

"  Then  why  is  it  that  we  cannot  huild  ships  as  cheap  here  as  they 
can  build  them  there,  if  the  men  there  get  higher  wages,  and  if  the  pur- 
chasing power  of  their  wages  is  better  there  than  here?  " — "  The  prin- 
cipal reason  that  I  know  of  for  not  repealing  that  law  is  that  at  the  present 
time  there  are  in  England  and  Scotland  ships  that  have  been  lying  there 
for  the  last  ten,  twelve,  or  fifteen  years  —  in  fact,  they  have  been  out  of 
use  altogether,  and  the  repeal  of  our  laws  so  as  to  allow  American  reg- 
istry to  foreign  bottoms  would  cause  them  to  bring  those  ships  over  here 
and  run  them  under  the  American  flag." 

"Old  ships?" — "Yes,  old  ships;  they  would  be  brought  here  and 
palmed  off  on  the  American  people.  But  on  the  other  hand,  by  not 
repealing  the  law.  in  a  short  while  our  companies  here  will  be  forced  to 
build  their  own  ships,  new  ships." 

"Then  you  are  not  afraid  of  the  competition  of  new  vessels  built  on 
the  other  side  at  the  same  time  that  you  are  building  ships  here,  but  only 
of  the  introduction  of  the  old  ships  that  are  already  built  and  lying  idle 
over  there  which  you  think  would  be  thrown  into  our  market  if  the 
navigation  laws  were  repealed?" — "From  the  statistics  it  has  been 
shown  that  one  gentleman  who  is  at  the  head  of  a  firm  on  the  Delaware 
river  can  build  ships,  or  he  says  he  can  build  ships,  as  cheap  as  $52  a 
ton  —  as  cheap  as  they  can  be  constructed  ou  the  Clyde." 

"  What  do  you  mean  by  $52  a  ton?  "— "  That  is,  constructing  the  ship 
from  the  bottom  up  at  that  rate.  She  has  so  much  tonnage ;  so  many 
thousand  tons  ;  and  he  says  he  can  build  a  ship  for  $52  for  every  ton. 
He  says  he  can  construct  ships  just  as  cheap  on  the  Delaware  as  they 
can  construct  them  on  the  Clyde." 

"What  is  the  price  on  the  Clyde  — $52  a  ton?"— "I  cannot  say 
what  the  price  is  on  the  Clyde." 

' '  The  wages  of  the  workmen  being  higher  on  the  Clyde,  have  you  any 
well-formed  opinion  as  to  why  we  cannot  or  do  not  build  ships  on  the 
Delaware  as  cheaply  as  they  are  built  on  the  Clyde?" — "Well,  you  take 
capital  that  is  invested  in  England  and  Scotland,  and  the  capitalist,  if  he 
can  get  4  or  4V£  per  cent  on  his  money,  is  content  to  put  it  into  manu- 
facturing business.  But  it  is  not  so  with  our  capitalist  here.  If  a  capi- 
talist here  cannot  make  15  or  20  per  cent  on  his  capital  he  is  not  going  to 
put  it  into  manufacturing." 

Then  it  is  because  capital  invested  in  ship  building  here  is  not  satis- 
fied with  the  return  which  capital  invested  in  ship-building  in  England 
is  satisfied  with.     Is  that  the  reason?  " — "  Yes,  sir  !  1" 

Here  we  have  the  whole  question  of  iron  ship-building 
in   a  nut-shell.      After    warning   the  commission  that  a 


EFFECT    OF   PROTECTION   ON   MANUFACTURERS.  223 

reduction  of  the  tariff  on  ships  would  take  the  bread  out  of 
the  mouths  of  thousands  of  workingmen,  Mr.  Curran  is 
forced  to  the  singularly  contradictory  admission  that 
English  workmen  on  the  Clyde  receive  higher  wages  and 
enjoy  more  of  the  comforts  ef  life  than  the  American 
workmen;  but  that  the  difficulty  in  competing  with 
England  is  due  to  the  greater  greed  of  the  American  man- 
ufacturing capitalist.  Mr.  Curran's  silence  concerning  the 
duty  upon  the  raw  material  entering  into  the  building  of 
iron  ships,  amounting  to  43  per  cent  in  the  average,  can 
only  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  he  is  one  of  the  bene- 
ficiaries of  this  tariff  robbery.  Is  it  not  plain,  therefore, 
that  if  the  duty  on  raw  material  were  removed,  the  Amer- 
ican ship  builder  could  not  only  compete,  but  undersell  his 
English  competitor ;  that  free  trade  in  ships  would  compel 
the  "boss1'  ship-builders  to  be  content  with  reasonable 
profits ;  that  in  reviving  the  ship-building  industry,  employ- 
ment would  be  given  to  thousands  of  laborers  who  are  now 
crowding  into  other  industrial  branches,  and  a  restoration 
of  the  ocean  transportation  now  monopolized  by  England 
be  looked  for. 

The  !New  York  Times  has  made  a  thorough  expose  of 
the  number  and  magnitude  of  these  peculiar  and  modern 
contrivances  of  our  manufacturers  to  escape  the  legiti- 
mate results  of  the  isolating  system  of  protection  consist- 
ing in  over-production,  lowering  of  prices  and  eventual 
bankruptcies.  Among  these  combinations  are  the  follow- 
ing: 

COPPER. 

In  copper  there  has  been  practically  a  trust  for  many 
years.  The  import  duty  on  copper  is  prohibitory.  All 
the  lake  mining  companies  have  been  so  completely  over- 
shadowed by  the  Calumet  &  Hecla  Mines  that  they  virt- 


224  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

ually  put  all  their  products  into  a  pool  which  has  been 
controlled  by  the  officers  of  the  Calumet  &  Hecla.  About 
twice  a  year  the  managers  of  the  pool  have  been  in  the 
habit  of  meeting  with  a  combination  of  manufacturers 
and  announcing  the  terms  on  which  they  would  sell  to 
manufacturers.  They  would  not  sell  on  any  terms  to 
brokers,  consumers,  or  speculators. 

The  following  memorial  sent  to  "Washington  was 
occasioned  by  a  dispatch  from  London  to  a  New  York 
house  ordering  3,000,000  pounds  of  copper  to  be  bought 
below  the  market  price  in  the  United  States. 

To  the  Honorable  Congress  of  the  United  States: 

Your  petitioners  respectfully  represent  that  they  are  manufacturers 
of  brass  and  brass  goods,  consuming  annually  over  ten  million  pounds 
of  ingot  copper;  that  the  copper  product  of  the  United  States  is  greatly 
in  excess  of  home  consumption;-  and  that  large  quantities  are  annu- 
ally exported.  They  represent  to  your  honorable  body  that  the  import 
duty  of  four  per  cent  per  pound  now  in  force  is  not  required  to  protect 
home  producers,  but  its  sole  and  only  effect  is  to  enable  speculators  in 
copper  to  artificially  enhance  its  value  by  exporting  large  quantities  at  a 
much  lower  price  than  that  which  they  demand  for  home  consumption. 
The  duty  is  thus  made  to  serve  only  the  purposes  of  speculation  and 
monopoly,  and  is  a  great  and  continuous  detriment  to  the  legitimate 
business  of  manufacturers  and  consumers.  We  therefore  pray  that 
ingot  and  all  manufactured  copper  may  be  placed  on  the  free  list. 

N.  O.  Nelson, 
James  Powell, 
John  Farrell," Committee. 

LEAD. 

The  production  and  price  of  lead  are  regulated  and 
controlled  by  the  National  Lead  Trust,  which  is  just  about 
completing  its  organization.  There  are  only  ten  or 
twelve  mills  in  the  country  which  smelt  lead,  and  they 
are  all  in  the  West.  These  and  the  mine-owners  form 
the  trust,  about  which  very  little  appears  to  be  known  in 
this  city  except  the  undisputed  fact  that  the  trust  exists. 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  225 

The  organ  of  the  trust  said  when  the  first  steps  in  the 
organization  of  the  trust  were  taken  :  "  The  present  price 
of  lead  is  about  as  high  as  it  can  be  to  maintain  its  stand- 
ing in  the  market  as  against  the  imported  article,  and  the 
aim  of  the  syndicate  will  be  to  keep  up  this  price."  The 
price  is  now  much  higher. 

paving-pitch. 

The  pitch  used  in  roofing  and  paving  is  said  to  be  con- 
trolled in  this  country  by  a  combination  in  Philadelphia. 
Not  a  yard  of  felt  roofing-paper  and  not  a  gallon  of  pav- 
ing-pitch, can  be  obtained  unless  permission  is  given  for 
its  sale  by  the  Philadelphia  syndicate. 

Eecently  a  meeting  of  the  coal-tar  or  pitch  distillers 
and  felt-roofing  manufacturers  was  held  at  their  head- 
quarters in  New  York,  and  the  price  of  felt  roofing  was 
advanced  twenty-five  cents  a  roll.  After  the  meeting  the 
members  of  the  combine  adjourned  to  the  Hoffman 
House  for  a  banquet.  Retail  dealers  in  roofing  materials 
say  this  advance  is  entirely  uncalled  for,  and  that  it  will 
ruin  their  business.  The  only  reason  that  they  can  assign 
for  the  increase  in  price  is  the  greed  of  the  corporations 
who  control  the  entire  production  in  this  country,  and 
have  for  two  years  been  gorging  themselves  with  enor- 
mous profits.  The  prices  at  which  the  felt  and  pitch  are 
sold  are  said  to  be  several  hundred  per  cent  of  the  cost, 
and  although  there  is  a  duty  of  twenty  per  cent  these 
articles  can  be  imported  from  England  and  sold  here  con- 
siderably below  the  present  prices.  But  the  strength  of 
the  pool  is  such  that  contractors  dare  not  buy  except  from 
members  of  the  ring.  The  consumption  of  tarred  paper 
and  roofing  pitch  has  also  been  restricted  by  the  advanced 
price,  and  people  have  used  tin,  slate  and  shingles  instead. 


226  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

CORDAGE. 

There  are  less  then  thirty  cordage  mills  in  the  coun- 
try, and  for  years  they  were  controlled  by  a  pool  which 
limited  production  and  fixed  prices.  This  pool  was 
broken  last  spring  and  a  new  one,  representing  two-thirds 
of  the  productive  capacity,  was  formed  in  the  summer. 
The  new  pool  is  said  to  control  the  supply  of  imported 
manila  and  similar  raw  material.  The  average  ad  valo- 
rem rates  of  duty  last  year  were  as  follows :  Manila, 
21.06;  jute,  20;  sisal,  14.80;  tarred  cables  and  cordage, 
30.13 ;  untarred  manila  cordage,  32.89 ;  other  untarred 
cordage,  30.08. 

RUBBER   SHOES. 

This  industry  is  said  to  represent  an  investment  of  $50,- 
000,000  and  an  annual  trade  of  $100,000,000.  The  duty 
on  rubber  shoes  is  25  per  cent.  Our  erratic  contempo- 
rary, the  Sun,  complains  loudly  that  "  it  is  well-nigh  im- 
possible to  produce  for  love  or  money  in  the  open  market 
a  pair  of  sound,  substantial,  honest,  staying  rubber  over- 
shoes," and  says  that  some  one  can  get  rich  by  making 
good  overshoes  and  selling  them  at  a  reasonable  price. 
"  We  venture  to  remind  the  Sun,  says  the  N.  Y.  Times, 
that  competition  has  virtually  been  killed  in  this  business." 

PAPER. 

The  paper  trade  in  its  many  branches  is  controlled  by 
as  many  trusts  and  combinations  as  there  are  ramifica- 
tions in  the  business.  The  entire  industry  is  apparently 
conducted  under  the  direction  of  a  few  committees,  with 
the  idea,  of  course,  of  maintaining  prices  and  regulating 
production. 

There  is  first  of  all  the  American  Paper  Manufacturers' 


EFFECT    OF   PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  227 

Association,  in  which  all  the  trade  all  over  the  country  is 
united  for  mutual  advantage.  The  members  meet  once  a 
year  for  discussion,  and  in  the  meantime  executive  com- 
mittees have  power  to  act.  There  are  several  divisions  of 
the  association,  each  with  one  of  the  Yice-Presidents  of 
the  ass  ociations  and  a  special  committee  to  regulate  its 
affairs.  There  are  the  envelope-makers,  division,  the 
blank-book  division,  the  book  and  news  division  —  mean- 
ing the  makers  of  papers  used  in  printing  books  and 
newspapers  —  the  writing-paper  division,  the  strawboards 
division,  the  straw  wrapping-paper  division,  the  chemical 
fiber-paper  division,  and  other  divisions  and  subdivisions 
of  the  trade,  including  as  well  the  manufacturers  of 
machinery  for  making  envelopes,  paper  bags,  etc. 

ENVELOPES. 

The  makers  of  envelopes  in  the  United  States  have 
made  a  compact  trust  and  prices  are  to  be  raised.  The 
duty  on  envelopes  is  twenty-five  per  cent. 

PAPER   BAGS. 

The  trust  formed  in  the  bag-making  industry  controls 
the  price  of  grocers'  bags  and  the  large  flour  sacks  used 
in  the  West.  It  is  stated  that  these  flour  bags  are  made 
of  manila  rope  stock  and  jute  butts.  The  duty  on  un- 
tarred  manila  rope  averaged  last  year  32.89  per  cent,  on 
manila  it  was  21.66,  on  jute  butts  19.13,  and  on  the  manu- 
factured bags  it  appears  to  have  been  35  per  cent. 

The  makers  of  strawboards  —  the  heavy  pasteboard 
so  extensively  used  in  the  manufacture  of  paper  boxes  — 
have  one  of  the  strongest  pools  in  the  trade. 

There  are  about  one  hundred  concerns  in  various  parts 
of  the  country  engaged  in  turning  out  strawboards,  but 
they  work  together  harmoniously  and  are  stiff  in  holding 


228  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

up  prices.  The  pool  has  an  executive  committee,  which 
not  only  fixes  the  prices,  in  accordance  with  an  agree- 
ment made  by  the  trade  at  the  general  conventions,  but 
they  regulate  production  also.  When  there  is  a  threatened 
abundance  of  boards  in  the  market,  so  as  to  endanger  the 
prices  fixed  by  the  pool,  certain  mills  are  ordered  to  be 
shut  down.  Several  mills  not  in  the  pool  have  been 
bought  up  by  the  combination,  so  as  to  prevent  overpro- 
duction. 

There  are  several  hundred  factories  where  straw 
wrapping-paper  is  made.  The  machinery  and  plant  used 
are  so  nearly  like  those  required  in  the  manufacture  of 
straw  boards  that  it  is  said  that  the  wrapping-paper  men 
could  turn  to  and  make  boards  if  necessary.  This  fact 
acts  as  a  partial  check  upon  the  strawboard  pool  and 
prevents  it  becoming  too  high-handed.  Ninety-seven  per 
cent  of  the  strawboard  makers  of  the  company  belong  to 
the  pool.  The  list  is  too  long  a  one  to  give  the  names 
here. 

The  straw -paper  men  have  also  an  organization.  It 
was  recently  perfected  at  a  meeting  in  this  city  under  the 
name  of  the  Straw-Paper  Association  of  the  United  States. 
Its  very  first  step  was  to  advance  prices  ten  per  cent. 

SCHOOL  SLATES. 

The  manufacturers  have  formed  a  combination  which 
controls  the  business,  and  this  combination  has  raised 
prices-  seventeen  per  cent  since  May  last.  The  duty  is 
thirty  per  cent. 

DUOK. 

All  the  manufacturers  of  standard  cotton  duck  in  the 
United  States  are  united  in  a  solid  pool.  They  have  com- 
plete control  of  the  production  in  this  country  of  the 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  229 

heavier  grades  of  duck,  such  as  are  needed  for  sail-cloth, 
tarpaulins,  car -roofs,  tent-cloths,  and  all  the  manifold 
uses  to  which  canvas  is  put. 

The  pool  is  called  the  Cotton  Duck  Association  of  the 
United  States.  It  was  organized  about  a  year  ago,  and 
is  a  flourishing  and  successful  combination,  which  has  put 
up  the  price  of  cotton  ducks  from  15  to  20  per  cent 
within  the  year.  The  organization  is  virtually  a  trust,  in 
the  sense  that  it  limits  the  output  of  the  mills  and  has  a 
pool  commissioner  to  whom  all  reports  of  production 
must  be  sent  from  each  mill.  It  has  also  a  rigidly- 
guarded  price-list,  which  every  member  of  the  trade  is 
obliged  to  adhere  to  under  penalty. 

WATCH   TRUST. 

The  following  statement  is  furnished  by  a  gentleman 

in  the  business : 

~~  About  three  years  ago  the  watch-case  manufacturers  of  the  United 
States  formed  an  association  for  mutual  rjrotection,  and  about  the  same 
time  the  watch-movement  manufacturers  did  likewise.  Then  the  job- 
bers in  American  watches  combined;  their  association  being  known  as 
the  National  Association  of  Jobbers  in  American  Watches.  The  Due- 
ber  Watch-Case  Manufacturing  Company,  of  Newport,  Ky.,  was  the 
last  firm  to  come  into  the  watch-case  combination,  and  shortly  after  it 
did  come  in  it  was  expelled.  That  was  last  November.  The  Rock- 
ford  (III.)  Watch-Movement  Company  is  the  only  concern  of 
any  pretensions  that  has  kept  out  of  the  watch-movement  com- 
bination. 

The  capital  controlled  by  these  three  associations  is  about  $30,000,- 
000,  divided  as  follows:  National  Watch-Case  Manufacturers'  Associa- 
tion, $5,000,000;  National  Watch-Movement  Manufacturers'  Associa- 
tion, $5,000,000;  and  National  Association  of  Jobbers  in  American 
Watches,  $20,000,000,  Now  these  three  associations  have  combined  to 
promote  the  interests  of  all,  and  the  triple  alliance  is  managed  by  the 
watch-case  and  the  watch  movement  manufacturers.  The  jobbers  con- 
trol the  greatest  amount  of  money,  but  the  others  control  the  produc- 
tion, and  that  is  of  more  importance. 


230  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

That  is  the  history  of  the  combination,  of  which  the  Brooklyn 
Watch  Case  Company  is  one  of  the  promoters  and  virtually  the  head. 
Just  now  it  is  and  for  some  time  past  has  been  endeavoring  to  drive  the 
Dueber  Watch  Case-Company  to  the  wall.  The  Dueber  Company  is  the 
largest  in  the  United  States,  employing  about  1,000  hands  turning  out 
about  1,200  watch-cases  a  day,  and,  of  course,  with  such  a  concern  on 
the  outside,  the  combination  finds  it  difficult  to  regulate  prices. 

CARTRIDGES. 

The  American  cartridge,  says  the  Times,  is  preemi- 
nently the  product  of  trusts  and  pools.  In  the  first  place 
the  lead  is  trusted.  The  formation  of  a  combination  of 
the  lead-smelting  firms  of  the  West,  under  the  name  of  the 
National  Lead  Trust  Company,  has  been  "  quietly  pushed 
to  a  successful  issue."  The  price  was  then  from  4.10  to 
4.45.  Since  that  time  it  has  been  carried  to  5.10,  and  it  is 
now  4.95.  The  smelters  are  said  to  be  exerting  some  in- 
fluence in  Mexico  with  the  hope  of  causing  an  export  duty 
to  be  laid  by  the  Mexican  Congress  on  Mexican  ores. 
Then  there  is  the  great  copper  ring,  which  by  cornering 
the  copper  market  and  making  pool  or  trust  agreements 
with  the  mines  of  the  world,  raised  the  price  of  copper 
from  £39  to  £85  10s.,  the  price  now  being  £77  5s.  The 
manufacturers  of  sheet  copper  are  said  to  have  main- 
tained a  "  combine  "  for  some  years.  It  will  be  seen  that 
the  component  parts  of  the  American  cartridge  have  been 
pretty  thoroughly  "trusted,"  and  now  it  also  appears 
that  the  cartridge  itself  does  not  go  into  the  world  of 
trade,  and  consumption  to  be  buffeted  by  the  blows  of 
competition. 

Other  combinations  of  a  similar  character  are,  the 
Standard  Oil  Company,  the  Cotton-seed  Oil  Trust  and 
the  Gas  Trust,  and  although  these  latter  monopolies 
are  not  the  direct  outcome  of  the  protective  system, 
they  are  the  logical  result  of  our  governmental  policy. 


EFFECT    OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  231 

All  these  combinations  have  one  common  object,  and  they 
must  stand  or  fall  together.  They  compel  the  American 
people  to  pay  from  fifty  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  per 
cent  more  for  the  articles  of  daily  necessity  than  they 
would  if  competition  had  not  been  throttled  by  the 
United  States  government. 

The  evil  spirit  which  keeps  watch  that  no  harm  may 
come  to  what  they  are  pleased  to  call  the  "American 
System  "  is  the  iron  king  of  Pennsylvania. 

Twenty-five  years  ago,  cotton  was  considered  by  far 
the  most  important  staple  product  of  the  country,  not  so 
much  from  a  pecuniary  point  of  view  as  owing  to  the 
tremendous  influence  the  cotton  planters  then  wielded  in 
the  legislation  of  the  country.  But  the  war  came,  and 
with  it  the  abolition  of  slavery,  which  dethroned  King 
Cotton.  Royalty  in  American  product,  however,  was 
maintained  and  its  scepter  was  transferred  into  other  and 
more  exacting  hands  —  the  hands  of  the  Pennsylvania 
iron-masters.  Iron,  to-day,  is  an  infinitely  more  powerful 
king  than  cotton  ever  was,  and  the  iron  grip  his  metallic 
majesty  has  upon  the  millions  of  white  slaves  of  this  vast 
domain,  as  well  as  upon  the  majority  of  the  members  of 
the  United  States  Congress,  may  cause  the  country  as 
much  suffering  as  the  grip  of  King  Cotton  caused  it.  He 
holds  the  key  to  the  situation,  manipulating  without  let 
or  hindrance  the  taxing  powers  of  the  federal  government 
in  his  own,  and  in  the  interest  of  his  allies.  His  will  is 
the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  so  far  as  matters  remotely 
connected  with  tariff  legislation  are  concerned,  and  no 
reduction  of  duties  on  imports  of  any  kind,  however  dis- 
tant from  the  iron  interests  can  be  had,  without  his  consent. 

His  royal  majesty  has  a  well-organized  corps  of  janis- 
saries, who  are  watching  along  the  line  of  his  protected 


232  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

underlings,  giving  alarm  at  the  slightest  break,  levying 
tribute  from  all,  for  the  support  of  his  iron  throne. 

This  organization  and  its  workings  were  fully  described 
a  few  months  ago  by  the  Detroit  News'. 

"  The  American  Iron  and  Steel  Association  is  a  power- 
ful organization,  composed  of  the  iron  and  steel  manu- 
facturers of  the  United  States,  bound  together  by  the 
strongest  ties  of  self-interest.  Its  organization  is  thorough. 
It  is  directed  by  shrewd  leaders,  it  is  never  in  need  of 
funds,  and  when  it  has  an  object  to  attain  it  moves  for- 
ward like  a  well-drilled  and  well  equipped  army.  Its 
headquarters  are  at  Philadelphia,  where  its  organ,  the 
Bulletin,  is  edited  by  James  M.  Swank,  a  statistical  expert, 
who  can  manipulate  figures  to  the  demonstration  of  any 
problem  in  finance  or  political  economy  —  at  least  to  the 
satisfaction  of  the  members  of  the  association. 

"  The  chief  object  of  this  banding  together  of  manu- 
facturers is  not  the  maintenance  of  established  prices,  the 
collection  of  information  about  the  business  in  which  they 
are  engaged,  etc.,  as  might  naturally  be  supposed.  These 
things  are  but  incidental,  and  are  of  minor  consequence. 
The  purpose  toward  which  the  association  bends  its 
greatest  efforts  is  the  continuance  of  the  iniquity  of  the 
protective  tariff  tax.  Without  this  special  privilege,  the 
iron  and  steel  industries  would  be  compelled  to  stand  upon 
their  own  merits,  as  do  other  kinds  of  business  which  are 
less  favored,  and  which  are  unshielded  from  competition 
by  an  "impregnable  wall  of  high  tariff  tax.  In  order  to 
combat  a  growing  public  sentiment  against  this  outrageous 
injustice  which  taxes  the  people  for  the  benefit  of  special 
interests,  a  large  amount  of  money  must  be  spent,  and 
the  beneficiaries  of  the  system  uncomplainingly  contribute 
to  it  with  a  lavish  hand,  for  they  know  that  they  will  get 


EFFECT    OF    PROTECTION    ON    MANUFACTURERS.  233 

it  back  a  hundred  fold.  There  are  pamphlets  to  be  pub- 
lished, newspaper  organs  to  be  maintained,  lecturers  to  be 
employed  and  liberal  contributions  to  be  made  to  the 
campaign  fund  of  congressional  candidates  who  are 
opposed  by  men  who  would  strike  down  this  iniquity. 
But  the  chief  field  of  labor  lies  at  the  national  capital, 
where  experienced  lobbyists  are  maintained  at  a  great 
expense,  and  where  the  kind  of  arguments  which  they 
commonly  use  are  most  effective.  This  is  undoubtedly 
the  most  expensive  field  of  operation  for  the  American 
Iron  and  Steel  Association,  and  it  is  the  most  generously 
cultivated,  because  the  members  well  know  that  it  yields 
the  most  liberal  returns. 

"  It  is  interesting  to  know  how  the  association  raises  all 
the  money  it  expends  every  year  for  the  maintenance  of 
this  special  privilege  of  taxing  the  people  for  the  benefit 
of  those  in  the  iron  and  steel  business  —  a  system  which 
has  developed  "iron  kings"  and  "  steel  kings,"  with  their 
millions  accumulated  in  a  few  years,  w^hile  the  poverty- 
stricken  toilers  in  the  mills  are  compelled  to  work  on 
starvation  wages.  This  is  explained  by  a  circular  which 
lies  before  us,  in  the  form  of  an  "annual  assessment," 
made  by  the  association  upon  one  of  its  members,  a  Mich- 
igan iron  manufacturing  company.  The  following  are 
the  rates  of  the  assessment : 

"  One-half  cent  per  ton  of  two  thousand  pounds  on  all 
pig  iron  produced  at  your  works. 

"Three-fourths  of  one  cent  per  ton  of  two  thousand 
pounds  on  all  rolled  or  wrought  iron  produced  at  your 
works. 

"  Two  cents  per  ton  of  twro  thousand  pounds  on  all 
crucible  steel  produced  at  your  works. 

"  One  cent  per  ton  of  two  thousand  pounds  on  all  blis- 
ter, German  and  puddled  steel  produced  at  your  works. 


234  THE   PROTECTIVE   TARIFF. 

"Three-fourths  of  one  cent  per  ton  of  two  thousand 
pounds  on  all  Bessemer  steel  produced  at  your  works. 

"  Three-fourths  of  one  cent  per  ton  of  two  thousand 
pounds  on  all  Siemens-Martin  steel  produced  at  your 
works. 

"  One  cent  per  ton  of  two  thousand  pounds  on  all  steel 
manipulated  at  your  works. 

"  Opposite  these  separate  items  are  blanks  for  the  dif- 
ferent amounts  and  the  sum  total  of  the  'assessment.' 
When  it  is  considered  that  the  mines  and  furnaces  of 
Michigan  alone  in  one  year  (1884)  produced  2,500,000  tons 
of  ore  and  pig  iron,  some  faint  idea  may  be  obtained  of 
the  total  fund  which  this  association  secures  by  means  of 
annual  assessments,  to  combat  legislations  that  threaten 
to  destroy  the  special  privileges  of  protection.  It  will  be 
seen  that  on  this  basis  Michigan  must  have  contributed 
$12,500  of  the  fund  for  the  year  1884,  on  its  pig  iron 
product  alone.  Add  to  this  the  assessments  in  the  various 
classes  of  steel  and  rolled  and  wrought  iron,  and  then  re- 
member that  the  other  iron  producing  and  manufacturing 
States  are  assessed  the  same,  and  the  reader  will  have 
some  faint  idea  of  the  enormous  corruption  fund  which 
is  raised  every  year  by  this  association  for  the  purpose 
of  influencing  legislation." 

These  are  rugged  facts,  calculated  to  throw  a  flood  of 
light  upon  the  paradox  which  some  people  wonder  at, 
viz. :  "Why  Congress  continues  to  pour  into  an  already 
overflowing  treasury  the  proceeds  of  an  oppressive  and 
unnecessary  war  tax,  and  why  the  waves  of  public  senti- 
ment in  favor  of  reform  beats  ineffectually  against  the 
doors  of  legislation. 

And  this  is  the  final  outcome  of  a  fiscal  system  of 
which  Mr.  Blaine,  page  212,  vol.  I,  of  his  Twenty  Years 
in  Congress,  says : 


EFFECT   OF   PROTECTION    ON   MANUFACTURERS.  235 

"Protection,  in  the  perfection  of  its  design,  as  de- 
scribed by  Mr.  Hamilton,  does  not  invite  competition 
from  abroad,  but  is  based  on  the  controlling  principle, 
that  competition  at  home  will  always  prevent  monopoly 
on  the  part  of  the  capitalist,  assure  good  wages  to  the 
laborer,  and  defend  the  consumer  against  the  evil  of  extor- 
tion f  " 


CONCLUSION. 


""TTTHEN  spoliation  has  once  become  the  recognized 

V  V  means  of  existence  of  a  body  of  men,"  says  Bas- 
tiat,  "  united  and  held  by  social  ties,  they  soon  proceed  to 
form  a  law  which  sanctions  it,  and  to  adopt  a  system  of 
morals  which  sanctifies  it." 

These  few  words  of  M.  Bastiat  fully  describe  the 
condition  of  affairs  in  this  country  to-day. 

The  tendency  to  organize  every  branch  of  industry, 
save  that  of  agriculture,  into  a  controlling  pool,  trust  or 
combination  of  some  sort,  for  the  purpose  of  destroying 
competition  in  order  to  "bull"  prices,  shows  the  exist- 
ence of  a  "  body  of  men  whose  recognized  means  of  ex- 
istence has  become  that  of  spoliation." 

For  the  last  quarter  of  a  century  the  national  legisla- 
ture has  lent  itself  to  the  framing  of  laws  which  have  sanc- 
tioned this  system,  and  the  American  people,  by  their 
seeming  aquiescence,  have  sanctified  it.  Protection  and 
spoliation  are  synonomous  terms,  and  monopoly  is  but 
"  protection  in  the  perfection  of  its  design."  It  is  the  legal- 
ized process  "  of  taking  money  out  of  the  pockets  of  the 
many  to  put  into  the  pockets  of  the  few,"  and  this  pro- 
cess must,  with  unerring  precision,  terminate  in  the  inor- 
dinate accumulation  of  wealth  by  a  favored  class,  and  the 
corresponding  impoverishment  of  other  classes. 

The  argument  of  Mr.  Atkinson,  that  machinery,  man- 
ufacturing facilities  and  wages  have  increased,  and  the 
profits  of  manufacturers  decreased,  and  his  denial  that 

236 


CONCLUSION.  237 

the  rich  are  growing  richer,  and  the  poor  poorer,  does  not 
dispose  of  the  question.  The  facts,  published  in  the  daily 
press  as  they  transpire,  and  the  proceedings  in  the  courts 
of  the  country  show  conclusively  that,  notwithstanding 
his  denials,  the  rich  are  growing  richer,  and  the  poor  are 
growing  poorer.  In  his  arguments  Mr.  Atkinson  seems 
to  deal  with  the  individual  manufacturer  whose  products 
have  fallen  in  price  under  the  natural  law  of  competi- 
tion. He  does  not  appear  to  take  the  circumstance  into 
account  that  competition  is  almost  a  thing  of  the  past ; 
that  combinations,  trusts  and  monopolies  are  the  rule,  and 
free  competition  the  exception. 

Circumstances  alter  cases.  Left  each  to  his  own  ex- 
ertions, the  manufacturers  would  compete  with  each 
other  for  the  home  market,  and,  in  order  to  obtain 
a  share  of  it,  each  (provided  he  carried  on  a  legitimate 
business),  while  not  selling  at  a  loss,  would  have  to 
content  himself  with  a  reasonable  profit.  But  by  com- 
bining into  a  trust,  the  foreign  article  being  excluded 
under  the  tariff,  the  American  consumer  is  placed  at  the 
mercy  of  the  manufacturers  who  raise  the  price  of  the 
home  product  at  will. 

Do  not  the  sugar  kings,  whose  yearly  exactions  have 
been  estimated  at  $10,000,000,  grow  richer  by  this  oper- 
ation, and  the  consumers  grow  correspondingly  poorer  ? 

Or,  if  a  combination  of  coal  barons  and  railroad  mag- 
nates can  compel  me  to  pay  $2  per  ton  more  for  coal 
than  I  ought  to  pay  but  for  such  a  combination,  am  I 
not  by  that  operation  made  $2  poorer,  and  have  not  these 
unscrupulous  operators  grown  correspondingly  richer? 

Suppose  this  process  of  extortion  is  repeated  upon 
every  article  of  household  and  wearing  apparel  purchased 
for  myself  and  family,  and  this  sum  is  multiplied  ten 


238  THE   PROTECTIVE   TAKIFF. 

million  times  (which  very  nearly  constitutes  the  number 
of  families  in  the  country),  do  not  these  aggregate  exac- 
tions, variously  estimated  at  from  $600,000,000  to  $800,- 
000,000  annually,  ruthlessly  taken  from  the  pockets  of 
these  ten  milllion  householders  and  put  into  the  pockets 
of  a  few  thousand  mine-owners,  manufacturers  and  rail- 
road magnates,  this  much  enrich  the  latter  (allowing  for 
loss  in  the  shuffle)  and  impoverish  the  former?  If  this 
pumping  process  is  allowed  to  be  continued  indefinitely, 
it  will  require  no  Adam  Smith  to  figure  the  outcome, 
and  the  most  elaborate  disquisition  about  the  "  wage 
fund,"  or  hair-splitting  arguments  on  "  the  distribution  of 
wealth,"  can  explain  away  the  fact  that  the  rich  monop- 
olists have  grown  richer  and  their  victims  have  grown 
poorer. 

Of  course,  this  matter  of  poverty  is  relative.  A  man 
need  not  necessarily  be  a  beggar,  or  be  really  destitute  to 
be  poor.  In  this  country  all  consider  themselves  poor 
who  cannot  clothe  and  house  themselves  respectably,  pro- 
cure enough  wholesome  food  to  eat,  and  cannot  give  their 
children  a  common-school  education.  Millions  of  the 
American  people  would  be  able  to  stand  this  constant 
strain  upon  their  resources  and  not  feel  perceptibly  poorer, 
but  these  extortions  of  forty  cents  on  every  dollar's  pur- 
chase seriously  affect  millions  less  fortunately  situated, 
with  but  little  or  no  opportunity  for  recuperation. 

The  prevailing  discontent  among  the  working-classes, 
more  especially  in  the  highly-protected  industries,  is 
mainly  attributable  to  this  cause.  It  is  something  more 
than  whimsical  fault-finding,  and  the  student  of  political 
economy,  or  the  statesman,  who  would  attempt  to  explain 
away  their  grievances  or  deny  their  existence^  is  render- 
ing a  questionable  service  to  his  country. 


CONCLUSION.  239 

As  some  writer  aptly  expresses  it : 

''  "We  are  living  here  under  the  immutable  and  inex- 
orable laws  of  the  social  organization.  We  cannot  cheat 
these  laws,  or  evade  them.  If  we  try  to  escape  their  oper- 
ation in  one  point,  they  avenge  themselves  in  another.  We 
cannot  manipulate  the  law  of  value,  so  as  to  make  things 
exchange  otherwise  than  in  the  ratio  of  supply  and  demand, 
without  losing  more  in  one  way  than  we  gain  in  another. 
We  cannot  legalize  plunder  under  any  guise  whatever, 
without  surely  wasting  wealth  and  impoverishing  robbers 
and  robbed  together.  We  cannot  arrange  any  system,  of 
gambling  which  will  increase  wealth,  since  wealth  comes 
only  from  labor  properly  applied.  We  cannot  employ 
the  taxing  power  of  the  government  to  increase  wealth, 
but  only  to  diminish  it." 

However,  the  evils  from  which  we  are  suffering  cannot 
all  be  attributed  to  the  vicious  system  of  protection,  nor 
is  it  claimed  its  modification  or  removal  will  prove  the 
universal  remedy.  But  one  thing  is  certain,  that  it  has 
contributed  more  to  the  unequal  distribution  of  wealth, 
to  the  creation  of  a  state  of  contention  between  labor  and 
capital,  than  all  the  other  causes  combined. 

The  beneficiaries  of  the  protective  system  should 
remember  that  sooner  or  later  "  murder  will  out ; "  that 
the  principles  underlying  this  government  have  not  yet 
been  suppressed  in  the  hearts  of  the  American  people  ;  that 
they  will  still  insist  upon  the  old-fashioned  doctrine,  "  the 
interests  of  the  few  must  be  subservient  to  the  interests  of 
the  many,"  and  the  enforcement  of  this  doctrine  by 
legal  enactments  must  at  no  distant  day  be  had.  How 
conservative  or  how  radical  these  changes  shall  be  will 
depend  upon  the  amount  of  resistance  to  be  overcome. 

A  removal  of  the  taxes  on  raw  materials,  and  a  cor- 


240  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

responding  lowering  of  the  taxes  on  the  finished  product, 
would  doubtless  satisfy  the  American  people  to-day,  while 
a  prolonged  struggle,  or  an  attempt  to  cheat  them  by  a 
repeal  of  internal  taxes  on  luxuries,  such  as  on  whisky  and 
tobacco,  might  so  exasperate  them,  as  to  cause  them  to 
demand  the  removal  of  every  protective  feature  on  the 
statute  books. 

The  American  consumer  must  steadily  keep  in  mind  the 
admonition  of  a  friend  of  the  people,  who  has  said  "  that 
it  ought  to  be  utterly  indifferent  to  the  man  who  has  to  pay 
the  money  for  the  higher  priced  article,  on  account  of 
the  protective  system,  what  argument,  what  pretext, 
what  name,  sacred  or  profane,  they  (the  protectionists) 
may  make  to  give  gravity  to  the  steal.  If  they  are  poet- 
ical, let  him  think  of  the  'Eule  of  Three.'  If  they 
quote  Scripture,  let  him  take  care  of  his  pockets,  and  if 
they  make  promises  of  the  home-market,  let  him  reply 
that  one  bird  in  the  hand  is  better  than  a  dozen  in  the 
bush.  If  they  make  promises  of  high  wages,  let  him  give 
the  answer,  that  cheap  rent,  cheap  capital,  and  cheap 
labor  is  their  motto.  His  money  which  he  has  earned  at 
hard  work  is  at  stake ;  therefore,  let  him  keep  a  clear  head 
and  a  cool  e}re, —  let  him  beware  of  quack  doctors  who 
make  long  speeches  ;  they  will  ravish  him  if  they  get  him 
in  their  nets.  Believe  nobody,  nothing — except  that 
two  and  two  are  four. 

"  If  an  angel  or  an  archbishop  preaches  anything  to  the 
contrary,  give  them  no  heed. 

"  If  judges  on  the  bench  contradict  it,  let  him  tell  them 
they  sit  there  to  administer  the  law  and  not  arithmetic. 
He  has  money,  and  therefore  everybody  is  in  a  plot 
against  him.  There  is  something  in  his  pockets,  and  he 
will  be  beset  right  and  left  till  they  are  cleaned  out." 


CONCLUSION.  241 

This  unique  piece  of  advice,  like  the  rules  of  the  Vicar 
of  Wakefield,  deserves  to  be  framed  and  placed  over  the 
mantelpiece  of  every  farmer  and  workingman  in  the  land. 

Had  they  followed  the  first  principle  of  this  advice, 
keeping  their  hands  upon  their  pockets,  as  well  as  their 
bosses  have  done,  they  would  not  for  years  have  been, 
with  a  prospect  of  continuing  to  be,  the  under  dog  in  the 
struggle. 

Under  the  deceptive  and  fraudulent  pretext  of  protec- 
tion to  American  labor,  the  privileged  classes  have  suc- 
ceeded in  persuading  a  majority  of  the  workingmen  and 
farmers  that  the  system  under  which  they  are  slowly  being 
ground  to  dust  is  a  blessing  in  disguise,  and  that  highly 
taxed  commodities  will  inevitably  lead  to  general  pros- 
perity; it  is,  therefore,  to  this  want  of  information  upon 
these  vital  questions  that  they  must  ascribe  the  largest 
share  of  their  troubles. 

As  stated  at  the  beginning  of  this  volume,  the  only 
'protection  the  government  of  the  United  States  can  legally 
bestow  upon  any  of  its  citizens  is  police  protection. 

But  instead  of  thus  confining  itself  to  its  duty  of  pro- 
tecting the  rights  of  the  citizen  from  the  encroachment  of 
others,  the  government  has  drifted  into  a  system  of  pater- 
nalism, which  is  constantly  devising  means  for  the  destruc- 
tion of  these  rights,  and  wThich  is  the  special  guardian  and 
advocate  of  a  preferred  class. 

In  violation  of  the  letter  and  spirit  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, innumerable  special  laws  have  been  enacted  for  the 
avowed  purpose  of  affording  valuable  privileges  to  private 
individuals  and  corporations  at  the  expense  and  to  the 
detriment  of  all  the  rest. 

The  welfare  of  the  individual,  however  humble,  can- 
not be  injured  without  detriment  to  the  whole. 


242  THE    PROTECTIVE    TARIFF. 

The  interests  of  the  nation  are  identical  with  the 
interests  of  the  individual. 

What  is  the  interest  of  the  individual? 

lie  wants  peace. 

He  wants  security. 

He  wants  freedom  to  be  his  own,  to  earn  his  own,  to 
hold  his  own,  and  to  exchange  his  own  surplus,  value  for 
value,  with  the  positive,  well-ascertained  surplus  of  others. 

How  can  there  be  peace  with  everything  ordered  for 
the  purpose  of  governmental  robbery  and  individual  dis- 
honesty ? 

How  can  he  have  security,  when  weakness  is  the  prey 
of  strength,  poverty  of  wealth,  and  honesty  of  fraud  ? 

How  can  he  have  the  freedom  of  his  own,  earn  his 
own,  hold  his  own,  and  exchange  his  own,  when  the  gov- 
ernment is  uniformly  legislating  against  him,  and  in  the 
interest  of  a  preferred  class  ? 


END. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


FEB  6     lafii 


ft.  MOV    8 
NOV  211976 


\9T3 


IK 


OlSCHAt^GE-URt 

MAR     8  WO 


Form  L9-25//i-9,'47(A56l8)444 


tWm'ERSITYofCAnrORNU 


3  1158  00567  3297 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  990  123    2 


